good evening and welcome to the Monday
May 14th
misuk was City Council committee work
session and council members are sorry
councils deputy president Vitesse
councilmembers winter Stein and council
member Ramos are excused this evening we
will start with ID 0 to 36 our strategic
plan with our own Jeff waddling arts
director all right thank you good
evening
excited to be here tonight excited to
walk through the the draft park
strategic plan we've had it out in the
community for about three weeks now
hopefully you've had a chance to to look
at it I know I've had a chance to talk
with a couple of you but really looking
forward to again walking you through
this and getting some of your feedback
comments questions hearing your
discussion as we begin to position this
for future adoption so what I hope to do
tonight is utilizing
both some of the pages of the PARCC plan
itself and some of the storyboards we
did some visuals that helped us as we
went back out to the public to talk
through this plan so using some of those
visuals walk through the plan but I
thought I'd start first with where we
started and that was as we launched into
this endeavor we were aware of some
really important goals and goals that
came from you as counsel goals we were
hearing from the community that really
came on the heels of the prior PARCC
plan and some of those goals that really
drove this was engagement it was
important to hear the voices that this
plan was very much informed and needed
to be informed by the community and the
voices of the community it's a plan that
really sought and needed to provide that
big picture that to provide a vision for
our parks our trails our open space
system to look at it comprehensively as
opposed to element by element
another one was really a goal that this
be an actionable plan this be something
that's usable something that as we
identify this as we adopt it it can lead
us it can inform us it can inform other
planning efforts and it can also be a
tool as those new great ideas come in as
they often do so I think this draft
really meets those goals I'm hoping to
go over this overview in about 15
minutes and then open it up for
discussion and conversation before I
jump too far in though I'd want to do
some introductions
Jennifer Fink who's been my cohort in
this as we've as as we've gone through
this Greg Brower
from Burger partnership is here sort of
the lead of our consultant team that
really aided and supported us
Brad booked our Park Board Chair the
park board has served as our oh and
Linda from the park board vice-chair the
park board really served as a steering
committee throughout this whole effort
as you see that I I go through this so
with that let's jump in so these next
two slides represent pages 12 and 13 of
the plan I wanted to highlight them just
because the process itself the timeline
I think really maps out the community
voices that that we really sought and
looked for throughout this process both
in terms of an initial outreach but then
check-ins and also through this timeline
the frequency and the amount of work
that the Park Board did is that steering
committee whether it was looking at
engagement strategies in March whether
it was the park board retreat we had in
August that really took the feedback and
started to align strategic projects all
the way through this process I'd also
point out in early January you'll see
and you'll recall we saw this
opportunity as this plan was reaching
its fruition central Issaquah visions
was doing its work in January we
initiated and really saw that
opportunity with the green necklace
in the parks department and the
consultant team taking a little deeper
dive into the green necklace and
bringing some some clarity and some
unity for that vision but also how
central Issaquah and the central
Issaquah plan and the part plan can have
a bridge that necklace can can serve as
a bridge between those two documents
I'll touch on the green necklace a
little bit later in the in this
presentation this represents the tail
end of that timeline so our artwork out
it squawk Valley Park so phase one
engagement we really began like many
strategic efforts begin really asking
and having aspirational conversations
with our residents aspirational meaning
what are your hopes dreams and fears for
the park system what's working well
what's not working well how do we take
that honest look in the mirror and asks
our community how the how the system is
supporting and serving them we had a
chance last August to update you in a
work session from that public engagement
and some of the the guiding principles
that began to take shape there are seven
guiding principles that you'll see in
these bullets that really began to guide
and shape the work that came after it
those those guiding principles were
community active lifestyles safety and
health nature and the environment access
and connectivity facilities and
maintenance looking at the long term and
administration overall administration of
the system what the what the community
told us in phase one engagement was
there are many many opportunities within
the system there was a lot of potential
within the system that they wanted to
see come out there was a real desire for
connectivity there was a real desire and
interest in how we might modernize our
system and some of our the active areas
of our system so that they can better
function and better serve the community
another element that began to come out
of
that phase one engagement that really
carried through this whole document and
quite frankly also carried through our
green necklace work was and it's
represented in the map below it's this
idea of we have this city that is so
blessed with public lands all around us
we also have a city that most of our
current residents live along the the
edges of the city and we have this
circle in the middle central Issaquah
that we are in the midst of really
trying to position for redevelopment so
this idea of these three concentric
circles if you squint and kind of think
of them as circles we have these three
concentric circles that really our
public system our public parks trails an
open space system has an opportunity to
connect and unify and support through
all three of those and so that really
began to resonate in our thinking and
our work and like I said carried through
carried through this effort so phase two
engagement took place last fall and
after we did a lot of work a lot of
evaluation a lot of assessment began to
put together and bring together some
strategic projects we went back out to
the community in the fall and really
wanted to hear back from them and really
ask hey did we hear you correctly
in phase one engagement we took those
projects and began to ask some questions
for our residents to prioritize those
projects to help inform that work we
also had a budget allocation question
that one of the tables in the park plan
really reflects some of the feedback we
got in that question we asked residents
how would they invest an imaginary
hundred hundred dollars hundred park
bucks
how would you proportionately invest
those hundred dollars over these five
general categories of investment into
our park system and those five were
acquisitions and preservation of natural
areas and open space additional athletic
field capacity connectivity
development of new city parks and
amenities and then lastly reinvestment
within our existing parks we got some
very interesting feedback we did this
survey through peak democracy we had
just over 600 responses
you'll see over all the responses were
skewed very much towards athletic fields
we really thought it was important to
dissect that further when we looked at
how Issaquah residents wanted to invest
into their system it was much more
balanced to be honest there was a lot of
proportionality a lot of balance between
those five critical areas when you
pulled the data from outside Issaquah
this isn't surprising we talked a lot
about this with the park board I would
say non-residents want to invest where
they and how they use the system so we
have a lot of non-residents who come to
utilize our athletic fields they'd love
to see more athletic field investment
that's not necessarily a bad thing but
it's important for us as we went through
the prioritization process and as we
went through prioritizing those
strategic projects and putting them in
near-term mid term long term buckets we
really felt it was a higher priority to
be most responsive to our residents in
our residents desire and interest to
proportionately invest into our system
sorry I have a question yeah there's
some thing go back to the previous month
there's some math error there because
for Sukhois residents and outside of his
club residents the numbers total up to
100% plus or minus 1% but overall
respondents that only adds up to about
90 percent and also that last category
reinvesting exists in existing parks if
it's what residents were 20% and outside
of his core residents were at 13 percent
the total couldn't be in 20 percent
right yeah so something there's some
math errors so yep we'll check that out
good catch
so themes as we went through both of
those sets of engagement these were the
the five themes that really resonated
and and really became framework for the
strategic projects themselves those
themes were I'll go down them
placemaking how do we collaborate with
the community to look at reimagining and
reinvesting into our public spaces our
parks our trails how do we strengthen
that connection between people and and
spaces and places placemaking is a term
it's a phrase that you maybe have heard
over the last 10 or 15 years that tries
to understand there's a there's a art to
public spaces that you you want to
create places that people want to hang
out in and experience it doesn't require
a scheduled activity to fill that public
space connectivity really speaks for
itself
it says it incredibly strong in this
community this desire to connect to and
within the city and and public spaces
and schools and shopping areas within
the city but also connectivity to the
public lands around us innovative action
how do we utilize an innovative thinking
planning creativity partnerships to
really explore and find opportunities to
maximize and position our park system to
serve our residents well now and well
into the future
vital environment how do we as we
understand well over 75 percent of our
land that we steward now is open space
and Natural Area how do we make sure
we're positioned to manage and steward
and celebrate that natural environment
and continue that legacy of investment
into protection of our of our public
lands within and around us
lastly active lifestyles how do we
understand there's an interest for
diversifying the opportunities within
and around our system and how do we
support that and look at providing
additional elements that support the
lifestyles that our residents want
looking at trail heads and and really
being strategic about where trail heads
are dog parks creative and more diverse
place paces on getting creative about
athletic fields are all examples of that
as we then landed upon the strategic
projects this is this sort of kicks off
the strategic project portion of the the
plan really that identification map that
takes that big picture and and I mean a
lot always reflects what we heard
collectively from the community this
represents 50 just over 50 projects 51
projects some large some small I think
it really reflects and reflects the
geographic balance that we were are
seeking to achieve and how we position
our our park system
for serving our community both current
and future this goal this desire for
unifying the system so as we're looking
at individual projects for years to come
we have a big picture we have an
understanding of how we're
comprehensively unifying the system to
balance those singular decisions on as
well as what I was saying earlier in
terms of projects that represent our
keen interest and desire in stewarding
and in managing our open spaces whether
it's the creeks corridors whether it's
our forested hillsides or other
sensitive lands in and around in and
around Issaquah what we try to do with
this map is we're where the projects had
an identified site and location we
mapped them as you become familiar with
this you'll notice some of the numbers
don't have a site identified with them
so they're on the table to the left
but they're listed as no identified site
yet dog park is one of those projects
that we see as a real near-term
strategic project but there's a sighting
process that we want to engage the
community with before we try and
identify that site within this planning
effort another part of this section that
complements will the the strategic
projects but one we felt was really
important to draw out in the strategic
plan is there are some really strong
movements and really strong elements
that we see in many ways already do
define our Park System but in some ways
could define this community's Park
system even more and it's this Creek
corridor this north-south corridor
that's identified by the blue and the
red really when you look at combining
what we have is the Rainier trail
corridor that connects to East Lake
Sammamish trail that actually connects
down south into Tiger Mountain along
with all the properties we've acquired
and the opportunity we have along the
mystic walk Creek corridor you have this
amazing compelling element that the
strategic projects really play upon to
create a north-south connection from
Valley Park to the south all the
way up to Lake Sammamish State Park and
Lake Sammamish to the north this is many
ways represented in another map when you
look at the acquisitions that have
already occurred the public lands had
already occurred along this corridor
it's not too hard really to begin to
imagine we we can start making these
connections in a lot of ways this vision
isn't a new one it's I think building
upon decades of of great work by
community leaders here in Issaquah this
plan just tries to I think bring a
bigger point of emphasis to the
opportunity that we have to really
create a strong compelling corridor
within our system
another corridor that we identified and
speak to in the green necklace as well
I'd just jump back to this is we have a
goal for a number of east-west
connections through the city but a real
strong opportunity we have in partnering
with other cities and with mountains the
sound is the mountains to sound Greenway
Trail and and this regional vision of
creating a trail corridor up through
mountains to Sound Greenway that
eventually quite frankly connects to the
vision that State Parks has for a trail
heading all the way to Spokane so the
opportunity we have of really making
that a strong east-west corridor and
where do we want to strategically locate
there where would we want residents and
visitors alike to experience this equai
as they as they go through that corridor
is a terrific opportunity another very
strong sort of anchor element to this
plan is the green necklace itself as I
mentioned earlier in January we had the
opportunity to lead an interdepartmental
effort to further clarify to further
build upon the work a lot of great work
that has happened with the green
necklace and the lens that we took was
how does this green necklace not only
relate and support central Issaquah and
and the very important goals of central
listicle visions but also how it
connects and supports the broader park
system as well we had a number of joint
meetings joint meetings being park board
and planning policy commission PPC it
was interesting as we went through these
charettes and these exercises so often
residents wanted to go outside the
central Issaquah borders meaning they
didn't want to just be constrained
within and so I think it really
supported that that concentric circle
map that it was emphasizing earlier as
we think of these seventeen elements
that that make up the green necklace
these 17 elements really have a
relationship to central Issaquah but
also to greater Issaquah as as well
somewhere in these charts it should
probably include the localized
connections into the mountains that you
know beyond the the major east-west
trail the fact that we have a bunch of
it'd be interesting to add to this the
connections up on to Tiger squawk and
cougar yeah so as we get into the
strategic projects as well it's a great
point we have a number of those
connections identified and really
opportunities to in some ways either
formalize or enhance some of those trail
heads so and some of those trail heads
are hard to do right like the one non
squawk up at my house that's 2,000 feet
above sea level but some of the ones
were on - squawk someone's on - cougar
or much closer to sea level much easier
to connect to I run apropos to some of
the other conversations that community
is having right now about connectivity
and open spaces absolutely no it's a
great comment in fact I would add one
that we really see is a strong
compelling opportunity to even this
anchor corridor and sea level as you
mentioned squawk Valley Park I'm going
to quickly point to it element 3 there
when you look at how that's
strategically located and I think right
now it feels isolated it feels
disconnected but what that property
represents not only as a starting point
for this this valley trail but we really
see the opportunity it could become a
trailhead as well it could be a park but
it could also without too much
imagination become a system as well so
as you look at the definition of squawk
Valley Park we're pulling out those
opportunities that really again look at
serving our residents but getting out
into the public lands as well one
example I like it because if you wanted
to 2,000 feet of vertical you know why
should you have to go all the way out to
- Tiger right why don't want to do it
closer yeah yep
well and as I think as we see some trail
heads in in and around us are
overburdened quite frankly and so as we
look at sort of spreading that out a
little bit and in creating multiple
trail heads to connect to a one item I
wanted to add to the necklace I
apologize is as as that work has been
going through Landon Shore and we'll be
going through Landon Shore in terms of
how that green necklace work connects to
centralist revisions we're also adapting
as we're looking at the park strategic
plan what we're planning right now
though it's not in the draft plan is
that green necklace the full body of
that work will become a chapter within
the park plan as as we're again sort of
ready to respond to what that central is
call visions work tells us but I think
what's what's important is that we
really see that work as a bridge between
those two documents the elements that
we've identified in the necklace a
number of those are part related
projects so we carried those same
numbers those same identifying numbers
are the same numbers those projects are
within the park strategic plan so again
trying to create that uniformity and
Jeff can you remind me what's the super
dark line that runs across near the
bottom of the State Park curvy very very
very dark line yeah that is a nested set
off right away trail connection that we
see connecting and really in some ways
being another east-west corridor through
town whether you want it to go to the
south on the Purple Line or whether you
want it to go through the State Park and
then imagine connecting to the it's a
quad creek corridor you'd be able to get
through town a variety of ways ask why
you denoted it differently than the
other proposed major
space or connections does it have a
different role or level of ordnance or I
think as we talk I mean given that it's
on state park land given that it's on of
it so well the oh you're right and then
East
I don't okay but it's similar to those
the north-south proposed major public's
base or connect yes yep so as we started
with the map of strategic projects and
then as you see in the plan we we took
those projects and gave descriptions and
and connected them to the themes we
conclude that section with this table
that tries to compact all that
information on these projects and how
they get sort of prioritized out in
near-term midterm and long-term buckets
these buckets are really intended then
to inform our future five-year CIP work
we've also tried to identify that we
have not and wouldn't want to go to a
level design that's able to cost
estimate all these projects we really
want to have future public engagement
helping to form that we have an
understanding we sort of did the Yelp
version of is it a one two or three
dollar sign in terms of level of cost
and complexity we also wanted to
identify those projects that we really
see as great opportunities for
partnerships whether public public
partnerships public-private or any
variety thereof we also though each
project was put in sort of a primary
theme many if not all of these projects
really hit on multiple themes in this
table it is a nice job of being able to
reflect and represent that question yeah
so going back to that for a second so we
have we haven't exists I'm sorry an
existing Park capital projects list
what's the relationship between the
intent of that existing list which
currently cover
through I think 2020 mm-hmm and this and
and what does this supersede or is this
in addition to you sort of get where I'm
going to great question yeah if you
remember as we went through that CIP
process it was always the one saying hey
this was a hard exercise because we
didn't have the parks strategic plan
done and we didn't really want to we
didn't want to guess and so I think that
CIP exists this then once it's worked
through and adopted this the park plan
would become that tool that would help
inform the next CIP the next five-year
CIP that we do first quarter of next
year there is some as we have looked
through and and are constantly I'm
probably looking at this in my sleep
sometimes by now there are a couple
projects that we've identified and as we
looked we looked at the scores realize
that there's some amendments one that
I'd want to point out that does kind of
tie to this CIP work is hillside Park
though it's identified here in the long
term it's intended to be near-term and I
think it's what it's representative of
and really reflective of is some of the
CIP discussions that happened
historically during the last Park Plan
process and also some of the feedback we
heard from the community as we went
through this that along with this mow
hillside Park is a large amount of
acreage that has a small park on it it
has a cemetery it has an interest for
more enhanced trails and opportunities
to connect squat community down to the
valley we really see that as being a
near-term project and given some of the
pressures and and policy decisions we
have around the cemetery and around that
park we really see the opportunity for a
bigger site master plan effort to help
really answer some of those questions
but doing that in the in the near term
is is something we caught in this as
well as we're doing our own vetting
through this through this draft process
thank you that thanks for the question
so this isn't meant for all fluff this
plan we we then wrap up with how are we
going to get there how are we going to
do this and I think the the simple
answer
much like the the Chinese parable one
bite at a time
it's really how this is going to happen
there's no magic in this but hopefully
as we do those bites as we have those
more informed future policy decisions we
were able to keep this big picture in
mind I think another key reminder and as
we were going through this effort this
table really began to inform and I think
helped some of these questions of where
does this fit where does this strategic
plan fit in a lot of ways this plan is
not an ends in itself this plans really
is it's just the starting line it's it's
not the finish line are we excited to
hear that but it really it's the
foundation and so this this this graphic
just helps to reflect the importance
that this work anchors and is the
foundation for future future work so
this Park strategic plan as you start on
the left side that is intended to inform
the comp plan the five-year CIP it's
another edit we caught that we need to
make discussions about funding
strategies how do we want to fund our
park system this is intended to inform
it this isn't intended to be the answer
for that other city plans so many other
city planning efforts going on that we
want this plan to again not be the some
type of mandate but it's really intended
to inform an influence whether it's
right away corridor planning projects or
old town vision or central Issaquah
visions that in turn obviously informs
annual budgets operating capital
discussions and and decisions by you as
council that then allows us to get into
actual capital project work and master
planning where we would see another
heavy more site-specific phase of public
engagement where
really going back out to the community
now that we have an actual capital
project that we're working on in
designing and planning for then all of
that work helps to inform the outcome a
completed project I'd point one thing
out in this table that the capital
projects piece is really an important
checkpoint and one that is I have come
on board here a year and a half ago I've
so enjoyed my time here there was a lot
of conversation going on about some
capital projects the skate park central
park pad one in particular and how are
we going to fund those and how do they
fit and I so often remember the question
how does this fit in the big picture how
does this connect to the big picture and
hopefully the next time we're at that
point of doing capital projects we'll be
able to collectively say oh cool this
this was informed by and we can look
back and see how it fits within the park
plan I think I'm Way over time I'll
close with this slide we also wanted to
ask ourselves and having the plan some
key questions of how are we going to
measure success for this plan how do we
know it's going to be successful and in
a lot of ways these questions really go
through that and allow us to think is
this is this serving as that big picture
we needed to be is this helping to
inform other planning work is it just
sitting on the Shelf gathering dust
that's not going to be successful
another part of these questions and a
key element we put into this plan is we
want it to be a planning tool so we have
a what we call we're actually probably
going to rename it but we called it the
toolkit it's not the full kit in itself
but it really is intended to be because
we know there's going to be the next
great thing that's going to come two
years from now the next great project
that wasn't in here that's the new hot
thing that's all the urgency we've built
this toolkit on towards the end of the
plan that really in essence allows any
new I
are thought to go through the same
vetting project that these 51 projects
went through so it really is hopefully
going to allow us to be nimble but also
be disciplined in that and not get
distracted by the next big thing but let
it vet just as as this other work went
through so with that thank you I think
in many ways this effort confirmed what
we already know this plan doesn't
represent a hundred and eighty degree
change from what this community has done
and believed in in many ways it builds
upon the great work of many leaders
through the decades
I'm Harvey Manning being one it was a
fun picture to end with but we had a
chance these last three weeks we had a
open house a couple weeks ago we've
gotten some feedback from the community
mostly really positive we have gotten
some great suggestions that are in some
ways helping us that they give anything
reformat
a little bit the plan and do some
additional refinement but look forward
to your thoughts feedback discussion and
where we want to go from here and before
we take questions from Council I just
want to mention to the public that it is
my intention this well it's always our
intention to take public comment in
these within these work sessions and
actually didn't last month and I
apologize but I will be taking public
comment as we go item by item so if
think about if you if you want to take a
couple minutes to give us your thoughts
and with that I will turn it over to my
fellow council members what do we
question x' we have councilmember Rey I
just want to start with saying Bravo
this is a this is really a nice piece of
work Jeff you then you and the team just
you know spectacular work a couple of
questions for you did you learn anything
new I mean you talked about how we kind
of built on the back of giants and we
confirmed a lot that we already knew but
what what what did you learn that you
you didn't know go
in what was your big aha moments great
question I I think one aha moment and
this isn't rare for Issaquah was I I
think it's a quiet times might have a
history of having active uses and
passive uses and some we compete against
each other and so how do we both in this
and in future work try and demystify
that and not think of those as
necessarily competitive elements but
very supportive elements and and try and
sort of lift that false choice if you
will between active and passive a
healthy vibrant system needs to be both
it has to be both I think something else
that was a real AHA was what I showed
you before that those concentric circles
and the opportunity we have to really
unify not see those as separate
districts or separate planning efforts
but those are really we need to connect
and create a system that supports in and
through all of its 'equal
or comments councilmember hunt thank you
at first I just wanted to echo
councilmember Ray's Bravo I think it's
very very thorough and very visually
appealing plan so thank you for
presenting it today and for all the hard
work I had a question about a couple
questions so the first one is how how do
you think community members will access
this plan or what are your plans for
being able to share the plan with people
in in the future and also give feedback
because I know that this will be a
living document in the future yeah so
this will live multiple places and we
definitely want this to live online this
will be a document that is we're doing
whether it's site specific master
planning work whether we're doing
whether that's with the park board or
with all of you we see this as being
something we're going to reference quite
often so we will hopefully foster and
really welcome residents to continue to
look at this and
and see this either online or hardcopy
and then sorry some questions about the
well so first about the survey which was
about there were two surveys in the
parks plan and one was 2015 so a little
bit older but it was a telephone survey
and that's the one that's referred to as
the statistically valid survey and when
I was reading the plan that was the one
that I gravitated to probably because I
had this big statistically valid survey
heading and so I wondered if you could
describe a little bit the differences
because to me the differences are fairly
significant and I noticed too that in
the in the online survey there's a
breakdown of about half a bit more than
half of the people said where they
resided but actually about half we don't
actually know where they resided so
we're looking at only about a quarter
that that we know for sure we're in
Issaquah and the phone surveys are a
little bit different in that regard but
if you could just describe the
differences how you see the two surveys
in terms of the outcomes absolutely I
think for the most part that the survey
responses were quite similar in
confirming for one another two of the
tables that we there's one table we pull
out on the plan and I know Thank You
councilmember hunt for referencing that
the table on page 18 was one that we
pulled out and then we pulled out the
table I just showed you from the the
phase two engagement again I think both
resonated that a lot of elements are
very important to our system whereas the
statistically valid survey asked
questions that didn't ask to
proportionately delineate between the
two they really spent a lot of time
asking what some what's important to you
singularly I think what we heard and
what we saw was some very very
impressive numbers
the table shows that that you know 90%
of responses feel that you know
acquisition of properties is important
and I think that really confirms what we
really wanted to drive in this plan that
in a lot of ways our natural
surroundings the creeks that run through
is that it so defines Issaquah and and
so I think we really carried that
through in how we prioritize investments
in the plan the second knowing we had
that statistically valid survey knowing
we didn't necessarily have the budget to
do another one that's where the that
Phase two investment we use peak
democracy and want it to not necessarily
just ask level of importance singularly
but hey if you had a hundred bucks how
would you how would you spend your money
how would you balance this ability to
invest that and so we think really saw
those and if you guys want to respond to
this is what we saw those as
complementary data that helped to build
and inform the prioritization and I have
one last question which is about local
improvement districts as a potential
funding mechanism I very briefly looked
online about this it seems possible in
some circumstances and so I just
wondered if you had any information
about that and I I appreciate the very
much the toolkit the list of potential
funding mechanisms and partnerships and
all and all of that creativity and this
was just something that I wanted to know
a little bit more about yeah
so in the in the big picture in the
funding chapter we in fact as we've
worked with our department feedback
interdepartmental feedback Finance
Department and others we're trying to
figure out how to that's not an
all-inclusive list there's so many
funding strategies that we want to make
sure in the final document were wording
that correctly we want this to inform a
funding strategy discussion and not try
and be the answer specifically to local
improvement districts it's it's very
interesting timing and
the state Parks and Recreation
Association as as we as professionals
are engaging with the legislature and
trying to figure out how to what options
do cities have what options do cities
and counties have one of the ideas being
explored is much like Transportation Li
Jie's what would it look like for cities
to have that as a as a tool to consider
either putting before their their voters
for a local Improvement District that
would support parks it's not that's what
I know I don't know that it's a tool
right now but it may be something in the
future for us to consider councilmember
Goodman thank you I don't have any
questions right now but I wanted to echo
the other comments and say still
digesting but from from what I have read
in here so far and I'm just blown away
by this this product that we have here
and really cannot emphasize enough how
pleased I am with this given where we
were when we first started this so thank
you very much for all the hard work
really much appreciate it a lot of
community voices in this one fun thing
we tried to do is you're looking at it
is and we're going to emphasize it a
little more you'll see quotes along the
way those aren't random quotes those are
quotes pulled out from all the the
survey feedback the resident feedback we
heard so one question and then some
comments and we'll get to public comment
in this state of the system you've got
you've got a couple of charts that look
somewhat similar but they're they have
an important difference and the first
one is parcels within a quarter-mile
walk of part trails and sidewalks and
then the second one is parcels within a
quarter-mile walk of park or open space
trails and sidewalks right and the
second one is a happier chart than the
first one right first one has some has
some recreation deserts to it
and and I think those recreation deserts
are real like I think it's great that
there's I mean I I live in an area that
has access to a trailhead almost exactly
a half mile away but it's it's a
trailhead up on to squat Mountain and
it's it's nice but I was just out in as
it happened the other night in claw
honey
where I lived in 2003 to 2006 and there
was just there's a tweak in my heart
because within two blocks of our house
was two kids parks and when we moved on
to squat my kids were 9 and 6 so they
were they were getting towards the end
of it but it's still I think there are
so many young families in these in these
parts of the city that don't have as
much recreation and I see this I see
this comment on the second page so many
properties categorized as open space are
readily accessible to pedestrians
if appropriately improved with amenities
these already owned lands can provide
recreation resources to growing
population centers yeah but right and I
go back to that squawk mountain trail
head which is you know room for about
six cars and and you just you start
walking on that trail right you know
open spaces open space and I think it
never substitutes
you know we run a risk if we try to do
too many things with a parcel of land
now open space wants to be open space it
doesn't also want to have swing sets but
we need swing sets and we need the other
amenities that that young families want
to get their kids out and get fresh air
when when fresh air is is worth getting
that having been said I'm also really
impressed with this report I know how
hard city staff has worked for the last
three years on this and I really
appreciate it and you know council as
has been has has really you know there
was good work early and then we were
like no we want even more because we
want this to be something that we can
really hang a lot of our public
decisions off of
through all your guys's hard work that
certainly seems it so I'm looking
forward to seeing what we do with this
going forward and seeing how this serves
us as we make strategic decisions going
forward and with that are there any
other comments all right so I will open
it up to the public and I want for
anyone who wishes to speak to this up to
three minutes with counsel or if nobody
wants to they don't have to Oh looks
like we have at least one person mister
Kapler come up to the mic not so much
about the the plan but the issue of
sports fields King County provides us
all these free parks in terms of open
space cooker Mountain both sides of
squawk Grande Ridge Park but if you live
out in Preston and your kids are in
soccer or something it costs you a lot
of money and King County to get some of
their money out of their park system on
these kinds of facilities charges plenty
and that's one reason we're seeing the
interest out there in more families that
don't maybe don't have their kids in the
more elite leagues and those kinds of
things are looking there they're come
there more in the Issaquah stuff in the
school district stuff and not in those
fields at Preston which are really tied
up with very expensive salt soccer
leagues thank you thank you anyone else
it's March
so one I think finally we might have a
chance of getting parks with intent
rather than just saying well look now we
have an opportunity and and we don't
really know we haven't talked to the
public but let's go for it anyway and I
appreciate that
to the nth degree they have worked very
hard now me I want to be able to use the
plan I want to be able to understand the
plan and I don't quite see you have one
of one of the issues that a person has a
good idea right and they say wow this
should go into our park system it's not
clear from this plan what sort of a
mechanism there is for those those good
ideas right it doesn't have a natural
interface with the public and within
that interface we live sort of in our
neighborhoods and this is not a very
neighborhood oriented plan and it has
many good things but how do you decide
whether you are satisfied with your
parks system and how do you ask people
whether they are satisfied every five
years you have a statistically valid
survey so that is not really answered
here to me it's like well when we
measure to see if it's working there are
really no measurables that are hard
there so okay if we're using soft
measurables who's ever asking the
community how they're thinking about
their park system and so I think it's a
little light on the community and the
goals and policies and it's light on the
community interface section and of
course I will pound on that because that
is that is my core I like that we're
looking at access we're looking at mulch
full uses of parks I am a little concern
that it seems to be we're planning hard
for parks for people who are going to
move here in the future and it doesn't
feel like the people who are already
here getting as much attention with this
plan so that is that is a little
distressing the toolkit that they in the
process that they put the projects
through doesn't have that lack of of
bias just the plan does and and so
that's a little awkward to me it seems
like if the toolkit is getting all the
neighborhood's the things that they
might need that the plan needs to
reflect that a little bit better so one
last comment which is going to make the
the parks staff even crazier than
they've already made them with my anal
retentive scanning of their plan I want
the conclusion and the short form of
what this park plan the strategic plan
is achieving at the front I want to see
very quickly that we got a cool set of
strategic projects out of it I don't
want to have to wait till the very end
after however many pages to do that so I
think with measurables up there and that
conclusion and then go into the plan and
how you got there that that's a better
format for me thanks thank you very much
so your Modell's wishing to speak to
this before I move on going once going
twice
all right with that we're gonna move on
to ID 0 to 1 6 transit oriented
development
presented by Jen Davis Hays and Al
Ferris and our own city administrator
here Emily moon thank you I just have a
few remarks as we kick this off miss Jen
transition slides here so we're here
tonight to advance the discussion and
deliberation on a particular aspect of
the transit oriented development
approach
staff presented a memo and a
presentation and a couple of policy
questions at the April 24th committee of
the whole those pieces outlined the full
Tod project and specific aspects of it
highlights from that presentation
included the funding update project site
considerations update and some next
steps which include confirming the
opportunities Center tenants and use and
a related city decision regarding a
potential investment in that space I
also included some aspects of our
negotiations and approval of a
development agreement as next steps and
lastly a next step of finalizing the
short plat this is a really messy
equation a very complicated puzzle that
we are trying to put together and we are
looking for councils input to help us to
limit or refine the options that are
available to us so we wanted to start
tonight by just saying we know it's
uncomfortable it's particularly
uncomfortable it's uncomfortable to us
as well because we still have imperfect
or incomplete information and yet we're
coming to you and asking for some
feedback at this time and that's because
we've accomplished a great deal so far
and putting together this highly complex
public/private partnership and while we
still have more to determine we believe
we have enough now to come forward to
you and engage you in some dialogue and
seek some direction so as you heard on
April 24th given the nature of the
project not all aspects of the project
are candidates for direct public
engagement and decision making but all
aspects will be reflected in the
council's deliberations on the
development agreement and other pieces
one aspect in particular where the city
is the primary decision-maker is the
opportunities center and that's what
we're focused on this evening also
attempted to keep the bigger picture
deliberations with the full council
and tonight's attendance isn't
reflective of that but that was the
attempt as we knew that there was full
council interest in this project and a
desire for all of you to discuss it with
each other another next step following
tonight will be to draft a resolution
with the developer regarding the city's
commitment to the opportunity center our
current timeline suggests that a
resolution could come forward on that on
June 4th so with that I'll turn it over
to Jen for the presentation great thank
you
Thank You Emily so again thank you for
being here tonight having us here
tonight to talk about the opportunity
center we'll do a brief overview of the
project and discuss the funding gap in
options and again we are here tonight to
receive direction on the opportunity
center use and investment and then we'll
talk about next steps so we have an
all-star cast here tonight that we'll be
presenting to you starting off with
Emily we also have our development team
health errors from spectrum development
solutions and Dan Landis from King
County Housing Authority and David
Fujimoto from the Office of
Sustainability will be here to talk more
detail about the opportunity Center so
start off with as Emily mentioned we
have done a lot of work to this point
and we are at the moment when we need to
have a direction from the City Council
in order to move forward we will talk
about these details tonight but we want
you to know that no decision has been
made on the opportunity center user or
an investment has been promised to this
point the timing is really important
because of the funding that the
development team has acquired from both
public and private funders and they'll
address that during their presentation
tonight so again as Emily mentioned we
hope to come back on June 4th was with a
resolution at the end of the the
discussion we'll talk about the next
steps which include community outreach
meetings we plan to have two of those at
least and then our development agreement
timing and I wanted to point out here
for the timeline because this project
has taking a while we've actually been
talking about this project for quite a
while it has many moving pieces and we
won't actually see the Tod project being
dawn until 2020 because first the
CenturyLink relocation site needs to be
built in CenturyLink needs to move but
that plan for the Tod opening is in 2022
so with that we'll move forward and so
we wanted to present upfront as you
listen to this presentation what are the
things we're requesting from you tonight
so should we continue to pursue the
medical dental and behavioral health
user that we identified through the
opportunity Center RFP which will
provide you more details with tonight
about and then is the level investment
acceptable for this public benefit and
we will have again options tonight with
with dollar amounts and we'll have that
discussion later any questions about
this so far yes I just want I just want
to make sure did I provide clarity so
there's a number there's this
Opportunity Center and there's a number
of different potential tenants that
could be engaged in the opportunity
center and you're gonna talk about a
couple of classes of potential tenants
and you want to know on at least one of
those let's say flavors of what the
opportunity center would look like what
our appetite is for that flavor given
what some of the what it might take to
make that flavor happen but there's
other flavors as well out there and it's
just on one of them it's it's more
complicated or potentially a bigger a
bigger bill than on other flavors and so
you want to understand how we feel about
that flavor but there's also all these
other flavors okay and yes and so the
direction you provide us with a decision
not not tonight but on June 4th if
that's possible we would then go and
pursue refining that flavor and coming
back for more details during the
development agreement process okay did
you have a question I have a procedural
question and just to clarify so tonight
we're really getting information from
you and then we will give you a
direction on June 4th is that the
thinking we would like some feedback
tonight as far as so if there's
additional information so we hope to
come back on June 4th with a resolution
for discussion but for also for approval
or to pursue whichever option
that again from tonight's discussion and
other information that we need to gather
and talking to their council members
that make sense and and I'm going to
it's unusual that we only have four of
the seven of us here so I'm gonna reach
out to council members we're almost
winter Stein and Batista and ask them to
get their feet back in as soon as they
can although with council member batiste
being out out of the country she's
probably gonna be a little bit slower
sure yes thank you so to step back for a
moment you know what is Tod so we as we
know we're community and transition and
we're moving from the auto oriented to
other options such as biking and walking
the concept of a TD is not one project
and so I thought this image really
reflected well what a Tod community is
about so we're talking about an area all
together so it's also tonight you heard
about the parks so Dziedzic plan that's
that plays a piece in it our central
Isabel plan plays a piece in it our walk
and roll strategy plays a piece on it
it's really bringing together diverse
high activity uses increasing transit
usage bike biking walking people who are
where people can live work shop play
learn all in one area so what we're
talking about for this one project does
not is not going to make a Tod area but
it's gonna help make a large investment
and start that towards our goal to align
with the central Issaquah plan so in the
central is a call plan this again this
this area is in the urban core our
regional growth center we're gonna
create more housing with this project
where there is no housing today we're
going to increase affordable housing
where there is no affordable housing
today we're going to create a mixed-use
pedestrian oriented streetscape which
again is lacking today we're gonna
provide additional public spaces that
are gonna interact with our park across
the street and we're gonna make sure
that the design is integrated with the
area amenity sentences Transit Center in
the park and overall it because it's
adjacent to the Transit Center it's
going to encourage increase encourage
transits transit usage again over time
we will see that change happening in our
community
so as Emily mentioned this is a complex
project we have multiple partners who
are involved in this and multiple pieces
of land it is definitely when we looked
at doing this project we approached it
as a private public partnership we
published the RFP for this project in
December of 2016 and at that time we had
been working with CenturyLink for over a
year to talk to them about their
interest in relocating to another site
they were happy where they are located
is an ease of access on on and off
multiple freeways highways they serve a
broader region there was another piece
of land in Issaquah that we could easily
identify for them to relocate to we had
the opportunity to purchase a king
county surplus land and that made this
whole thing possible so when we did the
RFP we worked with arch or our
partnership and funding to develop what
we thought was possible on this site and
so these are the requirements that we
said must be we received three responses
from spectrum in King County Housing
Authority from imagine housing and from
shelter resources our panel in January
2017 who included the mayor's office
office sustainability economic
development and arch to look at all the
proposals based on the development team
their project soundness the public
benefit and the project design so we
felt that spectrums and King County
Housing Authority's proposal best
represented the central Issaquah vision
and also provided additional benefits so
I'm going to have Hal and Dan come up
and talk about their proposal but before
I do they are there any questions about
the actual process RFP for this okay how
yeah
so when the RFP was first published they
called for 200 total units approximately
half of which were to be affordable oh
no hi I'm Hal fairest by the way I
didn't say that into the microphone and
I'm glad to be here tonight so so when
we reached out and asked if the King
County Housing Authority wanted to join
us we really had a vision greater than
what was required in the RFP to put
together and we really felt it was a
large site that the zoning was in place
and that the the opportunity was there
to really create something different
that has not happened in our region in
tarz integrating affordability with them
with the pedestrian orientation on this
site so we we submitted a proposal then
at that time had 325 total units and
there were approximately 155 that were
affordable in our submission along with
the commercial space and the Opportunity
Center in the quarter acre Plaza as we
worked that through there were a lot of
issues over the cost per unit to develop
that project and we get into the reasons
why here in a little bit but we worked
with the housing authority to see could
we better utilize the the structure the
podium that we were building and we came
back in August with a revision to our
proposal that increased the total number
of units to 355 and increased the term
the number of units that were affordable
to 175 and those are permanently
affordable units where previously some
of our units were only affordable for 12
years so those are things that we did to
try to make the application the Housing
Authority was to submit in September
more competitive so that we could be
more successful in achieving the money
they needed to provide the amount of
affordable units for the project and
away vans okay
this arrow this circle okay so things we
and we had come and talked with you
several times at this point in time and
we were maybe a application in September
September 15th I believe is when the
winning
to the county and shortly thereafter for
arch funding and at the same time we had
reached an MoU agreement along with the
city the housing authority ourselves and
Century Link and one of the things
CenturyLink including that was we needed
to be able to access their site to do
our due diligence it's called to test
for the environment all the soils the
survey and we weren't able to get that
until October so in late fall of this
last year of 2017 we went out and were
able to do our borings on-site to test
for environmental contamination to test
for the soil bearing capacity of the
soil and under underground conditions
and and to look at how our overall
design was affected by that information
and we found was wine was good news was
that neither the ground water nor the
soil tested positive above any cleanup
level there was you know minor amounts
they'd had a previously an underground
storage tank that had been removed and
cleaned up and they've gotten all the
paperwork signed off on that again prior
a couple years ago we did find however
which is probably no surprise to anybody
from Issaquah that the groundwater in
that location is six feet below the
surface I mean it's right there and you
can look at the wetland between
ourselves and the Transit Center and you
can see the standing water there many
months out of the year and certainly
during the winter time so that we had we
had previously made a revision to our
design which had put a connecting
parking garage we called down in the
ground and and then we were having this
large parking with underground basically
and some surface parking still
structured but behind the buildings and
we realized that you can do that by
pumping down the groundwater and
building a bathtub basically a really
big bathtub that would hold 275 cars but
we we felt that we wanted to take
another look at that so we've come back
with a modified design now that pulls
it's all 100% structured parking so
we're well in excess of your 50%
requirement
and we have some on great parking that
is immediately behind where the
Opportunity Center would be and behind
where the daycare and and the kidney
center would be but there is then a ramp
inside the structure that takes you up
to the next level where we have car
parking and then you go up to a level
above that so we basically went up
instead of down
and we saved the money on you know on
digging a hole and putting all the
waterproofing in but we have to spend
more structure and it pushes the top
floor of the building up ten feet higher
than it was before but it's still well
below where I think 85 feet tall total I
think when you go to 120 feet or 115
feet by your zoning so we're still the
maximum height we can go with our wood
frame construction so that that is
something we learned so that is our
third basically concept that we're at
now and we are looking to as with the
direction from the council on the
opportunity center we're actually
looking at trying to see if we can't
increase the amount of affordable units
the housing authority is doing an ad
hopefully ten more units with the same
within the same podium base that we had
before as we're able to kind of refine
it a little bit more and that's all good
news for Issaquah does nothing but
create more affordability and it again
helps bring down the cost per unit which
is what we're trying to achieve for the
housing authority so those are the the
highlights of where we've been in our
journey so far and previously the staff
had identified kind of in ranking order
all the funding that went into the
project but we had not filled in all the
numbers and these will change the only
thing we know for sure is that these
numbers will change and and most of it
will be the numbers at the top of the
list is compared to the bottom of the
list
and so you can see that where the bulk
of the money there's a loan that our
firm with our capital partner will take
out we utilize a HUD loan and it gives
us a long-term fixed mortgage rate which
is what makes it attractive but there's
58 million dollar loan 30 million
dollars in private equity that are there
Norton our capital partner will be
putting in so those are prime
early going to the market rate and the
affordable units that we have within
that building and it's also the same
building that right now under one of the
scenarios where the kidney center and
the daycare would also be located and
then the other Dan come up and talk
about the other sources of funding that
King County Housing Authority has put
together we do have the the commercial
tenants that the kidney center will own
their space like a condominium so their
space of about 10,000 square feet will
cost about nine million dollars and then
on top of that they'll put all their
equipment in and all their other
improvements that go into that and then
the very bottom the multifamily tax
exemption that you've waived subject to
our development agreement being approved
would be benefiting the you know the
private side of the development so you
can see the city is an instrumental
piece in terms of the chess making and
making all the pieces work but in terms
of actual economic contribution they're
very much in the minority at the bottom
of the list with a very small percentage
of the total capital and and I did want
to say I spoke last time you saw me at
the committee of the whole
and was expressed my opinion about the
Opportunity Center Pacific specifically
health point and and the mental health
provider Valley City's not being the
best choice and my my opinion on that
was specifically related to the one as
you'll see that it it requires the
greatest commitment from the city and it
does require additional parking above
and beyond we together at the Housing
Authority and ourselves we are very
comfortable with the use of the health
facility at this facility I've been to
since it was first proposed my wife and
I have driven around and seen several of
the health point facilities they're very
nice they're well very well done the
people that participate there are their
primary constituents are people using
Apple Health Medicaid supported health
care and those are people in our
community that are at great risk in
getting health care so it's a it's there
isn't another facility in Issaquah that
provides that and it's getting harder
and harder for people
Medicaid to be able to find carry our
you know service providers that will
service them so there would be a good
asset the other not-for-profits the
proposed as well also provide a need
service that there's great need in
Issaquah as well so I think those are
choices that the council needs to
consider in their deliberations I'm Dan
Landis I'm with King County Housing
Authority and I just wanted to briefly
talk about the financing that we have
raised for the affordable units as well
as what's left for us to raise and we
got the good news is we have gotten the
hardest money that there is to get in
this the ten million dollars from King
County that was a I think twice what
they put into any other project so far
and so we a lot of people went into the
success of that including the city of
Issaquah extensively lobbying on behalf
of the project and that's stadium bond
money right every time you go to a
Mariners game or a Sounders game you are
helping build transit or development at
this point and the the other funding was
from arch two million dollars which also
is on the high end of what they've ever
given to a project and both of those so
we were awarded the county money in
December and I think we've been awarded
the arch money haven't gotten the
official word on that yet but the and
certainly the city of Issaquah should be
thanked for contributing to that as well
as a number of other Eastside cities the
so that money is competitive money we
had and we got more than are we asked
for the moon and got the moon and so
we're really happy about that well
however the majority of the financing
that will it will take for us to build
the housing is yet to be secured and
that's the low-income housing tax
credits and the tax exempt bond
financing neither one of those are
particularly competitive we will get
those but what we don't know at this
point in time is how valuable they will
be you may have seen in the in the last
six months how the taxes that low-income
housing tax credit program has kind of
been turned on its head and it's a lot
different than it was when we submitted
applications we foresaw some of the
changes and I think our the pricing for
those tax credits that we had in our
application is still accurate to what it
would be today but we don't know what
it's going to be when we actually go out
and sell those tax credits right before
we start construction so we're a little
concerned there and we're concerned
about interest rates rising as I think
Hal is too for his his portion so we are
very anxious both to show progress to
the public funders that have already
committed money to this as well as to
avoid and/or get this get get us to the
point where we can lock in the rest of
our financing which we really can't do
until we're about ready to start
construction so your ability to sort of
help us tie up all of the pieces of this
and especially the the financing for the
Opportunity Center is really helpful
thanks Dan and Hal so as we just saw the
project itself is a 165 million dollar
investment so as we tonight talk about
investment from the city we wanted to
let you see what the city or it has
already committed for investment so the
top number here is the city waived
impact in permit fees and that's already
in the IMC so this is just for the res
for the affordable housing residential
units so the project will pay for impact
fees for the for the market rate
residential units so that does not mean
that we're not being paying any impact
fees on this and the commercial spaces
will also pay impact fees the relocation
site cost so that's again for the
purchase remediation short plat of the
portion of the king county island or
king county roads property it's about
three hundred thousand dollars and that
is cash that the city has expended
already and then the property tax has
not collected over 12 years for the
multifamily tax exemption is valued at
about eight hundred forty thousand
dollars so again this is on the
residential portion of the Tod that we
will still collect during that 12 year
period property tax on the land and
property tax
the commercial space that is not a
nonprofit city and we will also collect
property taxes on the new location for
CenturyLink which is currently not it
was outside the city yeah we know what
that same collection would be from
CenturyLink do we know like what we
would collect total over those 12 years
if this project goes forward versus what
we would collect from CenturyLink if
nothing happened on that property yeah
CenturyLink over 12 years pays about
fifty nine thousand dollars about sixty
thousand dollars a year I'm sorry for
the full 12 years yeah that's the city's
portion of property tax yes so so for 12
years CenturyLink if we didn't do
anything we collect about $60,000 and
CenturyLink it's a utility and it's in
this good a little more detail but the
their assess their rate statewide as to
kind of ensure that there's continuity
between the different counties and then
kind of passed down through King County
so it doesn't you know it doesn't
fluctuate as much as some other
properties may it would be nice if we
could when we when this bill comes back
to put that up to show you know you've
mentioned it verbally a couple of times
the you know we would have taxes coming
in on the other pieces but it would
probably put a nice big exclamation
point on it to show it versus that 60
perfect will do and then so again as I
mentioned so the the top and the bottom
amounts the so the total is 4.4 million
dollars the 3.2 and the eight hundred
forty thousand dollars again are things
that are not cash out they are not
collected but as far as cash out so far
there's been three hundred thousand
dollars I put some notes at the bottom
of some points of interest and we can
dive into more this at a later time if
you're interested in hearing so for
every dollar the city is putting in
we're we're leveraging that with $36
from other investors and then also we're
looking at the city investment per
affordable unit and we calculated right
now at twenty five thousand dollars if
we get more units that'll course go down
and I looked at the city investments
we've made previously in the range that
we have had
we've subsidized other affordable
housing has been from 12,000 to 60,000
dollars so we're well in that range on
the lower end and if we actually have
some additional units that'll even go
down a little bit more yeah
councilmember Goodman thank you so for
the relocation site cost it says
purchase in a mediation short plat for a
portion of the King County Island is
that $300,000 that seems low if you so
we purchased the entire 20 acres for
seven hundred and sixty-five thousand
dollars and so the portion of that for
the 4.6 acres of the IC the intensive
commercial portion is in that the
remediation is completely for this site
and so that's about $150,000 and then
the short plat we're still kind of
totally met up so I want to say that's
probably ten fifteen thousand dollars so
what seems what seems missing from there
okay okay any other questions about our
investment to date okay so why are we
here so we have as Hal has mentioned as
the more we move along when the more we
learned when we have discovered a
funding gap in the actual entire project
the when we did the RFP we asked
respondents to use a plug figure of
three million dollars for a cost to
build a new facility for CenturyLink we
did not want each respondent to have a
different amount a different assumption
as they as we're trying to compare
proposals we use that we got that
estimate because we were provided the
model of what CenturyLink is currently
building in other parts of the country
for instance this one we received was
from Arizona it's about a 7,000 square
foot office and locker rooms and all the
cars were parked outside as we move
forward and we looked at what had
started to have a conversation with
CenturyLink they're interested in having
what they have here currently at their
site so currently at their site they
have a 35,000 square foot building where
they have office space of about 4,500
square feet and then have over 78
parking spaces into interior to their
building
park their their work vehicles and their
personal vehicles during the day we we
plan to have continued have some
conversation with Centrelink about if
that's possible how has gone around and
looked at other CenturyLink sites
throughout the region and none of them
have the full interior parking of other
vehicles so we believe there's some
leeway and negotiating with them about
that but for now this has this change
has resulted in a funding gap of four
million dollars in in the pro forma and
we have worked with the developer in
many different ways to address the
funding gap so as hal mentioned he's
redesigned the building three times
they're trying to find ways to to
maintain the amenities but to reduce the
cost and we also needed to gather more
information about what we needed so
tonight we're gonna address two of those
five RFP requirements of how we started
to address that and I'll address the
second one first so in the RFP we
requested a 2,000 square foot
residential assisted living cell and as
we started working more with our
development team King County Housing
Authority mentioned that there is a
source from the state that was coming
available that would actually be an
appropriate funding source for this and
they agreed to take the lead to apply
for that with our assistance but to
apply for that funding and actually
incorporate that those living units into
their building in a more cohesive
fashion so that reduced the gap by about
a million dollars if we get that funding
the other piece that we're gonna address
it and then we're here to talk to
tonight is the original requirement was
a 10,000 square foot ground-floor
commercial shell space for nonprofit
services so before again mentioned we
got we gathered more information we had
this idea in 2016 that we needed some
additional space for nonprofit services
but we didn't know if nonprofits that we
wanted that we're currently in the
community or wanted to be in the
community could actually pay for those
space and how much that would be so we
did an RFP which we were to talk about
tonight to better understand what the
the interests and also the the ability
for tenants to pay for this because
again we we understood that there's
gonna be some additional cost for this
space or we want to make sure we covered
for this space and so we were pleasantly
surprised we had and David will talk
more about the RFP responses but we we
had needed to gather gather that
information so that we could come to an
understanding that there was desire for
ten thousand square feet so obviously if
there wasn't then we would have be
having a different conversation any
questions to this point okay oh yeah
okay so tonight we're gonna be
discussing three options and I wanted to
make it clear that the options that you
see here are for the unfinished shell
and so we know that there will be tenant
improvement costs and after receiving
direction from the council in which
which user type of use and size we will
work with the nonprofit to better define
what that contribution and that sharing
of cost is for the tenant improvements
we always intended that that would be a
shared cost or potentially full cost for
the tenants we don't have that exact
figure for tonight but what we need to
again get direction on is what the city
is willing to do for these different
options so the three options tonight are
to maintain this 10,000 square foot
again to look at for the the nonprofit
service providers to be to provide it so
that's the original proposal if it's
going to be at a commercial use through
our RFP process we did identify a user
that isn't very interested and that's
the medical use and that's a 2.8 million
dollar gap the difference between the
2.3 and 2.8 is the additional
infrastructure difference acquired for a
medical user and then the third option
is to reduce to 3000 square foot plus a
thousand square feet of shared space and
we do have some interest from a non
profit for that and we'd have to
identify other services to collocate
with them and there's no additional
costs for the shell but there would be
potentially for the tenant improvements
what's when you say three thousand
square feet plus a thousand screed it's
a thousand square feet of shared space
yeah
what's the shared space yeah so one of
the one of the concepts and this is
again isn't set in stone either is one
of the concepts that we heard in the and
the application are the RFP interviews
was a desire to have meeting space
that's a little larger for
for the nonprofit's to utilize and so
Hal and we're working and talking to his
other tenants recognize that the kidney
center also needed a space where would
be a teaching kitchen have a space for
for meetings and such so the way it's
designed at this moment is that's the
shared with the other users on you know
on the site so again that's not
solidified our decisions been made but
that's the proposal as now yeah so again
tonight we are hoping that we will
receive some direction from the four of
you regarding the type of nonprofit
surface service and also the acceptable
investment david is going to dive into a
little bit more details with the
Opportunity Center that process and the
details any questions for me before I
yep councilmember hunt thank you on the
last slide the so reducing to 3,000 plus
the 1,000 shares so that that's a
difference of 7,000 square feet between
option two and three and so would that
be what would be the plan for that 7,000
would be another commercial meaning if
the Opportunity Center was not was not
built to the 4,000 what the other seven
thousand would be so the layout will be
different and you'll see that on the
slides and the so there's a lot of
different changes so like the the
parking that were required for that then
would be reallocated or not needed to be
found in other locations I know there's
other aspects but the layout would be a
different format there yeah
can I ask City Administrator moon
regardless of what the money goes for in
other words which these options we feel
has vowed community value at how much
the most expensive is 2.8 million
dollars do we have an idea how we would
fund that if we move forward with that
option I think Jen has actually had some
discussions with the finance director
and finance director feels fairly
confident that there
a couple different ways that we could go
about providing that amount and do you
want to elaborate yes so there are some
end of fund balance options there's also
looking at bonding we have the capacity
to bond and one of the things with this
opportunity Center investment is that
you will be receiving annual rent or
lease income so that at this moment we
believe that that would cover the bond
payments and/or pay you know pay into
future opportunities and I think there's
a larger discussion that's going to be
happening to counsel about investment of
city dollars but this isn't okay one
more thing before we move on
so there's bonding there's ending fund
balances and there's also other funds
right like I'm thinking specifically of
the nine hundred and sixty five thousand
dollars that we have in the human
services fund that came from Tallis that
we have not spent yet that would be
neither bonds nor ending fund balance
are there other is there other coins and
the cushions that we couldn't look for
you've identified the three primary
sources that we have also talked about
okay yeah Thank You councilmember
Goodman thank you the two point three
and two point eight funding required for
unfinished shell is that the tell me
more about is that the city's portion or
is that with the tenant be paying for
some of the improvements or so the
unfinished cell would be the city's
commitment if we're going to maintain
ownership if we would look at
potentially future lease to own options
and that we obviously be covered through
that but the tenant improvement so the
shell is going to give you the concrete
cement look you know of a build out with
stubs for plumbing and and other things
electricity but the tenant improvements
to actually build out the space walls
and other things carpet that's the
that's the piece that we would then
after Direction received from the
council go negotiate that next step so
the funding required for unfinished
shell the difference between the three
is it what is required to be in the
10,000 square foot spaces to the
unfinished degree it's just more costly
why is there no I mean if it's all it's
the funding gap that we partially the
funding gap that we identified earlier
with the difference in cost so when they
created their pro forma they assumed one
thing and we now found that that's a
more costly thing so in order to still
provide the 10,000 square foot there
needs to be an investment to bring that
gap down and we again reduce that gap
from 4.4 million dollars to these
figures here before tonight sure I
understand you identified a four million
dollar gap yes so where does the plus
million fit in so we worked other ways
to reduce the funding gap so one of
those ways was for King County to find
funding for one of our requirements so
that reduce it about two million dollars
the other way we did some adjustments to
the to the design for and we also are
not paying for our portion each of these
owners quote-unquote we would be an
owner of the site are going to be
condominium condominium owners we
actually reduced the land value of that
they were kind enough to say oh you know
what this we don't need to charge you
the land portion of this so there's been
some give-and-take with the developer
that we've already had to get it down to
2.3 million dollars for the 10,000
square feet or if we wanted to do the
medical user it's 2.8 because of
additional infrastructure that needed to
be installed prior to the tenant
improvements so we're not asking for the
full four we did some work to get it
down and now we're here to say are you
willing and interested in investing in
one of these options
I was a member fund thank you so I think
that what would be really helpful for
the next meeting for me would be a table
with this information with the gap and
then you identified the one that 1
million for the the
and the assisted living space and then
you have these other options that will
close the gap and and and what would be
needed so I think that in a table form
that would be really helpful and just
show how it adds up and then you can
also put in the additional information
that you just shared about how that gap
has caused Thanks thank you other
questions all right
okay we're gonna get details thank you
David Fujimoto director of the Office of
Sustainability and we'll return to those
slides again at the end of this really
again just to kind of reinforce where
we're essentially problem solving for
that gap so the original RFP originally
had stated a 10,000 square-foot space
for nonprofit services who discovered a
number of things as we progress through
kind of the discovery process
understanding excite conditions and a
variety of different parameters
understanding differences in costs and
so that's what has led us to this this
gap that we're trying to achieve
so rewinding just a little bit and
talking about the opportunity center the
whole nexus or the whole origination for
the opportunity center as a part of the
overall Century Link Tod project was to
find innovate innovative ways to help
address community needs by providing
nonprofit services in our community you
know one of the most significant
barriers that we've identified to
providing services locally it's really
been the affordability of facilities in
the high cost of land that we're finding
in Issaquah this has some roots back to
a former project which was the Human
Services campus there was some work done
by a community group that was working
together with the together center out of
Redmond they were looking at benefits of
a co-located human services type model
they showed the importance of low market
rents to being able to make that
feasible and they identified a range of
services that they felt weren't needed
in the community this project is not
attempting to replicate that but it is
drawing from pieces of that as well as
some worked on a community needs
assessment which is more recent and
speaks more specifically to human
services needs
but ultimately the purpose of the
opportunity center is to as it says here
to expand services locally or to enhance
them we're really looking at this as an
opportunity to increase the services to
the community not just relocate existing
services we want to try and address some
of those needs that were identified in
the community needs assessment and also
with that reducing some of those service
access issues there were a number of
those that were identified to the
community needs assessment
transportation being primary also some
system navigation related issues
culturally relevant services things like
that as Jen had mentioned in order to
help us get more information about
potential tenants and what their
criteria would be we developed a request
for proposals back in the fall of last
year leading up to that work we actually
did some work have some pre-planning and
investigative work so that we would have
a better sense of what to look for out
in the communities so we did some
interviews with some Human Services
agencies we talked to her with our Human
Services Commission we did a survey of a
number of agencies that were operating
in the region to get a sense of what
their plans were what were the needs
they were seeing what services they were
providing in Issaquah and we've heard
back a range of things we heard that
everything from we just need a space for
staff to be able to locate and kind of
hotel when they're here in Issaquah all
the way up to interest in citing a
satellite location relocating a main
office or providing additional new
services in our community so we heard a
range of services something from very
small to much more kind of robust
options so this helped us to identify a
variety of kind of types of services and
types of spaces that could be located so
this was also office space classrooms
training centers a range of kind of
medical service providers counseling
services and things like that we let
this request for a proposal in the fall
and we received four proposals which
you'll see here the first was kind of
this consortium involving at work with
encompass life enrichment options tab on
Learning Center and Friends
youth and they came together with a kind
of overall joint proposal primarily
focused on services for youth and young
adults with developmental disabilities
it also included some pediatric therapy
for children with developmental delays
and then some youth behavioral services
and homeless outreach services primarily
through Friends of youth for this
proposal all but encompass currently
have operations in Issaquah encompass
operates out of North Bend so this would
be a kind of an extension or potentially
relocation of services in the case of
that work and have on elsewhere within
the community they had requested a full
10,000 square feet for as a part of the
proposal as a part of the process of
working with them became clear they're
still developing some site concepts for
this use they were discussing issues
like a retail space a coffee shop
potentially having a commercial kitchen
on site a little bit of lack of clarity
on leasing requirements and kind of a
very low range $4 per square foot
interest in ability to provide for lease
the next one was a organization called
icrons-- they're a smaller behavioral
health provider they have locations
currently in Bellevue and Seattle no
current locations in this acqua this
came in as a singular proposal they were
looking for about 1,200 to 2,500 square
feet
they provide outpatient mental health
services psychiatric medication
management care coordination some
employment services for youth and adults
and young adults as well and there are a
smaller organization I think their total
financial annual budget is on the order
of 2.2 million versus that first group
which is more close or closer at about
24 million per year combined so they had
pretty limited capacity for tenant
improvements and really needed to have
kind of some pre furnished spaces in
order to expand their operations locally
into Issaquah the next one was a
combination of Valley cities and a
health point they currently operate in
multiple locations in
South County as well as Redmond
locations
Renton as well they don't currently have
an issue qual location but our servant
has Choir residents and they had
requested a full 10,000 square feet as
part of their proposal process Valley
cities as was noted previously provides
for behavioral health services to both
mental health services as well as
substance use disorder related services
and health point provides comprehensive
medical and dental services both of
these agencies provide services to
primarily low-income households about
93% of clients for Valley cities make
less than $17,000 per year and about 96
percent of clients for health point are
around or below 200% of the poverty
level which is about I think believe
it's around $24,000 per year so
definitely low income spectrum of the
health of communities what's interesting
about their proposal is the Medicaid
system Medicare system is definitely
moving to an integrative care system
where they're integrating both
behavioral and physical health services
all under one roof kind of a whole body
care approach and they're actually ahead
of the game so they've actually started
to do this work and they have
partnerships and providing that kind of
approach with their facilities and
working together financially these
organizations are much more significant
they're on the order of about a hundred
and thirty eight million dollars
operating revenue or budget on an annual
basis they are able to pay for leasing
arrangements and can participate in
tenant improvements the last one is hope
link hope link is also a fairly large
large organization at about 14 service
locations in the King County area they
don't have a current Issaquah location
they were looking for a smaller
footprint for their operations typically
they operate both a food bank and then
some stability services that go along
with it because Issaquah has a food bank
they wouldn't choose to cite that kind
of a facility here but they would work
in partnership with an organization like
the food bank so they were looking at
maybe about 1,400 - I think up to 1,800
square feet so again a smaller footprint
mostly kind of council
make services some training spaces areas
like that as I mentioned before
providing for financial resilience
energy assistance Family Development
Employment Services and adult education
organizationally there are at about 62
million in terms of a total budget so as
a part of the review of these proposals
we took a look at several different
things we looked at service need and
delivery shared and supportive functions
this kind of goes back to that idea that
we heard that some of the nonprofit's
wanted to work together and potentially
shares spaces some smaller organizations
such as was proposed in that first
consortium could band together and
provide some services we also looked at
alignment with the overall Tod project
site to make sure that there were
compatible uses and that there were some
opportunities for actually leveraging
services we looked at the the
organizational capacity but also
alignment and whether or not the
organization's who were proposing had
Itzik Wanda radar or whether this was
just an opportunistic kind of shot in
the dark so we looked at that we also
considered whether it advance equity and
sustainability and economic vitality as
part of their proposals as well and then
any special needs that they might have
because of their specific site or
service requirements and we also when
we're reviewing these proposals
we included staff from the mayor's
office we had an economic development
office of sustainability involved in
that work both spectrum and King County
Housing Authority sat in on the
interviews and then we had a
representative from the Eastside Human
Services forum as well as our chair from
the Human Services Commission sit in on
those interviews as a part of that work
the city administration identified
health point in Valley cities as a
leading proposal because they expand
services to the community there are new
services they're not currently provided
within our community
it was addressing this priority service
need that we had identified in the
community needs assessment and it
improved access by bringing a service to
Issaquah so that was really addressing
if
low-income households aren't able to
find service health services locally
they really have to go outside of our
community we know that transportation is
a significant barriers to bring that
service to the community was seen as a
positive benefit and then also we
identified that they have a strong
financial position and the ability to
pay for lease so going into a few of the
options as Jen had noted before we've
really laid out three different options
offer up operating from the premise that
within the original RFP with the for the
project as a whole for the Tod site it
had come out with the goal of 10,000
square feet of an unfinished space so
this first option really keeps with that
that approach and says ok so if we were
to maintain that goal of 10,000 square
feet what would be required for
investment to address that gap that's
been identified excuse me
and so that's really this 2.3 million in
investment for the shell we did see some
services we just received two proposals
that were interested in the full 10,000
square feet one was the at work
consortium and the other was the health
point which we'll talk about is the next
option as well and then as we just spoke
about in terms of financially the city
does have some options for how we would
approach this we can put forth
essentially cash towards a project we do
have the ability to finance and talking
to our finance director generals and we
don't have a limitation on a bonding
capacity it's really a cash flow
question so that's not a consideration
so in a way it's a little bit of a
different equation because we do have
the potential for gaining revenue as a
result of this project so it is more
feasible if from that standpoint likely
also commercially viable from that
capacity simple payback on some of those
investments would be on the range of 10
to 12 years
let's see so that's option one option
two this is really where with getting
more specifics as a result of the RFP
process we understand for medical and
dental services provided on site there's
different infrastructure requirements
this in part relates to the construction
practice or construction methods that
are necessary in order to provide for
the additional plumbing ventilation and
other requirements and so that does add
about five hundred thousand dollars to
the cost for the corn shell to be
developed at this option and it also
requires is so the more specialized
planning for that build-out and of that
ventilation and because of their the
interest in this in working with that
partner there is some potential interest
in long term ownership that's so that's
something that we can also consider as
well whether they can make some
investments over time we're potentially
in a lease-to-own arrangement and one of
the pieces that still to be sorted out
with this option is considering the
parking requirements and what needs will
be necessary on-site as well as through
some of the adjacent sites in order to
make sure that we have sufficient
parking to make to meet the demands of
this service and as I mentioned before
Health Point has indicated an interest
in and ability to contribute to tenant
improvements the third option was
pursuing an Avenue where instead of
maintaining the square footage allowance
was more focused on the part about
providing space to the city at no cost
which was a secondary requirement for an
additional requirement for the
Opportunity Center part of the Tod RFP
and so this was the results of some
problem-solving and part of the
developer to figure out how could we
make that work it does result in a
reduced footprint about three thousand
square feet plus this one thousand
square feet of shared spaces this does
change the dynamic on the user types
that we can accommodate in this space
most likely the strongest candidate
would be something like a hope link
which can provide for some of these
finance
stability stability services and
employment services we do know that they
wouldn't necessarily want that full
space so we would need to either work
with them to think about how they might
be able to provide some management some
additional space and allow other
nonprofit users to use it or potentially
find a secondary user so back to this
chart as we've talked through there are
some key pieces about size and services
and cost really some of those those
issues about size do tie to some of the
services and the ability to meet certain
services the 10,000 square foot space
without an identity and identify tenant
at least at this point in time is
potentially the highest risk because we
don't have a guaranteed revenue stream
that would or we certainly we don't have
a guarantee but we don't have an
identified revenue stream or partner as
released as a result of our process to
date that could use that space for the
ten thousand square feet link to
healthcare provider it's primarily an
investment risk it's a question of
having potentially a strong known
partner financially who can provide for
some resources to contribute to the
project but there are as some additional
costs for build-out and there are some
additional requirements for the city in
terms of its property management
responsibilities the city yes on the on
the first option didn't you say at work
was potentially what was the issue that
works suggestion of ten thousand oh
thank you so at work who was requesting
the full ten thousand square feet one of
the the concerns was that their their
plan for the use of the space was not
fully fleshed out and that's something
that did come out in the interviews and
through some follow-up conversations
with them we were concerned about what
the structure of that arrangement would
look like thank you and also since that
time encompass has also identified an
alternative location for their services
in the community so we're not we don't
believe that that lease in that prior
configuration is a salad option
thank you for clarifying so and then so
the ten thousand square feet for the
health care provider good finance strong
financial partner can contribute
additional cost for build-out some
additional responsibilities in terms of
city property management we do provide
that capacity on other city properties
this is maybe a little bit of a
different equation and but at the same
time it may be the best option for
bringing these types of services to our
community yes just speak to those
additional city property management
considerations
sure and I'll ask Emily to join in here
as well so the city does provide for
property management responsibilities is
on a number of sites both on facilities
that we own as well as ones that we
lease to tenants and there's a variety
of different flavors of that if you will
we do provide leases to nonprofit
organizations such as at work or to the
food and clothing bank we also have some
commercial spaces that we lease this is
a newer property that will have some
higher financial obligations associated
with it and it just would need to make
sure that we've got the capacity to
provide oversight on that sorry yeah so
we'd be the landlord so we would just
need to work out what does that mean
we'd have to work out a particular deal
you know which which are tenant
requirements and which are the landlord
requirements Thanks I can shed some
light on that the the Opportunity Center
regardless of the size will be you know
a small piece of the big project and we
will have a property manager on site and
each tenant will pay for their
proportionate share of the sidewalk
sweeping and the the mechanical
equipment maintenance and those are
things that we will want to control as
the landlord of the overall project
where the Sheridan you know with the
insurance so I would for resources of
the city I think it would have a much
diminished strain on your resources
because that property management really
wants to be handled by one firm for the
entire project not broken up with a
bunch of different
pretty managers you know doing each
little space you great and then
continuing to that third option the
reduced space at 3,000 4,000 square feet
probably the lowest risk and no
additional financial investment on the
city's part there as was discussed
before there's potential for tenant
improvements there is a known partner
potential partner with a strong
financial position but a different
variety of services that could be
operated out of that space additional
partner or use of that space would need
to be identified and there yeah I guess
so there's some unknowns about that
those services that would be provided
the other piece to that is we do also
know that hopefully has a strong
interest in coming to Ezra kua they've
identified a service location in their
strategic plan they have been actively
pursuing locations in Issaquah and in
fact how to identify two previous a
different site in Issaquah that didn't
pan out so there's a chance that they
will be able to find some location in
Issaquah through that avenues or other
avenues as well so with that did you
want to wrap up or do you want take
additional questions at this point I
think we can keep going so we I think
the remaining slides are just on in
terms of next steps in terms of overall
schedule and future topics so I think in
terms of kinds of those questions about
the different options those are really
the areas where we're seeking some
feedback councilmember Goodman I'd be
interested in seeing the next slides
okay
okay so on that we actually blew up this
area of the timeline so the next council
actions again we're hoping to come back
on June 4th with the opportunity center
resolution which would commit to the
development team that we are interested
in pursuing X amount of square foot with
X amount of funding investment and then
we the next point that the council will
be able to make a decision is the
process of the development agreement
negotiations and approval which we
anticipate between July and September we
will also plan to there's again there's
some steps in here that that the DOE
development team need to do such as you
can see they're in june going and
getting a HUD preliminary loan
application approval which then allows
us to proceed with a community meeting
in July and then also a second one in
September we're looking at we will look
at those community beings to get input
regarding how to activate the public
spaces looking at the public plaza
looking at the mid-block crossing and
the street frontage making sure that
those are and welcoming and vibrant like
we all want to see in our central
Issaquah area and then during the the
development governance is actually to
development agreements when regarding
the project site which is between King
County's spectrum in the city and then
one regarding relocation site which is
between spectrum the city and
CenturyLink so again those two are
connected but separate as far as the
locations so we here in front of Council
multiple times talking about the drafts
and negotiations there and that just so
your reminder that will actually be a
legally binding contract with explicit
numbers spelling out roles
responsibilities investments so again a
lot of the things we've done to this
point will be reflected in the
development agreement and then between
now and the development time we'll
continue to refine the numbers that we
will come back with and have in the
development agreement details
any questions about those next steps yes
come summer Rae I don't know if it's
next steps driver questions so at some
point in I don't know if it's the
development agreement or when when do we
reach an agreement with spectrum
spectrum mm-hmm yes okay this is this is
the cost for the opportunity center for
the entire project
whole thing development agreement yeah
so there will be multiple pieces so and
in that there you know we will say what
we commit to and he will the the
development team will say what they
commit to so that would be this many
units this you know again providing all
the pieces of the puzzle and again it's
a legally binding document at that point
and at that point we nailed down exactly
what the city's contribution to the
adventure is yes
in total yes so the June 4th again the
resolution we need so we need to know
what our Opportunity Center investment
appetite is prior to the development
agreement because there are design that
needs to move forward we need to have
those conversations the Century Link and
etc so I'm sorry and HUD application so
they the HUD application they're gonna
show the concept design so those three
pictures we showed you they're gonna
show that they're going to discuss what
how that layout is and you know talk
about the strengths of the partners etc
so they can't go there with three or two
options you know HUD will just say come
back when you're ready
and that's actually a new step since
since they've applied for the RFP so
again things change in all parts of our
world here yeah and just so you know
there's a currently a Tod website we're
gonna have the Tod as on the active
projects list so that people can kind of
follow it that way and on the Tod
website it talks about the presentations
you know that we've already made in
council so people can become more aware
of that yes there are three potential
check writing opportunities one is the
development agreement the first
development agreement right but there is
potentially on the second depending on
how the second goes and then isn't there
a
based on depending on tenant
improvements true so what we hope to do
is between now well June 4th and the
development agreement time is to get a
letter of interest or intent with
whoever we decide to lease with now
depending on which option we choose we
may be able to move faster or slower
according to that and then we would be
able to bring forward what that
additional cost is but again there may
be some range versus an exact dollar
amount depending on how far we get with
those negotiations but the intention is
to be able to lay that out thank you for
pointing that out
and so the two development agreements
come together through counsel so it
won't be one and then the other because
again they are interrelated as far as
with the land transaction so there's
just not a need for King County Housing
Authority to be involved in the Century
Link site and vice versa
got it other questions before we move to
the last slide and so the last slide is
just when we talk to council members and
others we just want to make sure that we
know that again the Tod project has
multiple topics and we didn't want to
lose these these are some of the things
that were mentioned in those briefings
so we want to make sure that we address
at a later time and if there's
additional points that you like us to
address whether it's through the
community meeting or in a future
briefing we want to make sure we do that
but so this is a list making sure the
two buildings feel as one I think that's
one of the the points of the strength of
Spectrum's proposals that they are going
to have one property management firm
they wanted to look the same on the
outside and how can we how can they are
really interested in making this a
community versus one building versus the
other and then looking at the parking
needs investment per for double unit
we'll we'll refine and design and
mid-block crossing in the plaza so those
are things that again we'll be talking
about more later but we really tonight
need to get back at direction from the
four of you about your desire for the
opportunity center thank you either
material that you want to present before
we discuss this
I don't believe so anybody from yep so
if it's okay with my fellow
councilmembers I would like to take
public comment before we discuss this
I'm getting general agreement so I'm
gonna offer if anybody in the community
wishes to speak to this issue I would be
happy to extend than three minutes is
Marsh so I'm up here again saying there
has been absolutely no public vetting of
this this is a lot of money no one has
ever asked the community how they want
the money spent or if they want it spent
on this every time I ask the question is
like well it was part of our public
needs assessment I'm sorry we have
transportation issues we have lands we
want to purchase people cannot even stay
in their own homes yet you cannot be
bothered to go out to your community to
ask them if they want to spend money on
someone else moving in to town and have
them giving giving them a cheap house oh
I'm choking up like merry I don't know
how many times I need to come to the
microphone and say this is a community
decision this is not a well you know
when we come back we're gonna see if the
public plaza is okay within this thing
that we've already said yes to you've
done it before it doesn't come out well
it pisses the community off sorry
language and then when you ask us for
things we won't give it to you because
you've basically funneled us in a
direction and never asked if it's our
town and our money so this is one of
those things that is making me so grumpy
that I will activate on it and you don't
want me to activate on something I
actually like which is transit oriented
development do the process right don't
avoid us and see if the community is
willing to support what y'all seem to
want so much one last thing
staff presentation
Shen's should be even-handed there
should be no pom-poms it should just be
the facts and yet again the pom-poms are
out and that is it's our town so my
three minutes are probably up and think
about us because we pay thank you is
there anyone else wishes to speak to
this issue this evening anyone else
going twice
going three times all right thanks so so
and of course the four of us are here
council is lucky enough to have three
former chairs of the city's Human
Services Commission those are the three
council members who are not here this
evening but we will soldier on as best
we can councilmember hunt I'm gonna
start with a few questions actually if
that's okay so this the first one is not
maybe something that you can answer
today but it's something that I would
really like to know before I make a
decision in June and that's about the
the transit-oriented use of these
different how the proposed uses mesh
with transit oriented use so if there is
any information that could be provided
about health health point and Valley
cities in terms of the needs of those
people to use the transit versus the
hope link and versus the at work because
I think that that's important one thing
that's really important here is that
we're combining multiple needs of the
community in terms of we do have a need
for health but we also have a need for
transit connections and so potentially
if we can make the synergy happen there
I think that's important and I don't
personally know how that works out so
that if there's information out there to
help me with that that would be much
appreciated if it can't be answered
today then that's great but if not and I
meeting we will over question from
health point in Valley cities about
their current who they're currently
serving one of the unknowns is they're
not currently here in as well so they
don't know how many people who would
live in Issaquah would come to Issaquah
versus you know going to rent in or
Bellevue or another location but we can
get some of that date the data about
their current usage right and I think
more than more than just how far do they
come it's more my question is more how
likely are they going to be to use the
bus system and then also so for for
future topics there is a question in
here for future topics
there's the integration of separate
buildings to feel as function as one and
I I see that there's a configuration
change of the buildings when depending
on which option and I think basically
whatever use goes into this space will
affect not only how the community that
comes and uses the space but also will
affect how the community that lives in
the other part of the building it will
affect the functionality of the building
potentially and the most obvious is I
think that it changes the footprint of
the building and so I wondered if you
could speak at all to how the different
options might affect the people that are
living in the building and the function
of the building for them
as far as the the residents of the
building there there isn't a significant
difference in how one option versus the
other if you notice the big difference
between the two really has to do with
the location of obviously kidney center
in the daycare and with the daycare
located in this configuration their
entire play area is down on the ground
floor it has to be fenced off by their
licensed student requirements and in
this situation only the the smaller kids
a toddlers have their plague area down
there and the play area for the rest of
the kids is up on the or up on the deck
with the residents above which works for
the daycare facilities so that's one of
the major impacts to the tenets of the
building that for the daycare they
prefer it down on ground but they've
done it the other way as well
the kidney center you know they they I
think like the other location better
because they have the visibility from
April Street we just felt it was better
for the communal center if they're going
to be part of the project to have that
visibility and the kidney center does
benefit from the Moores you can't stop
and drop somebody off on Maple Street
it's a really busy street with no
load/unload
in our new street you'll be able to do
that and the kidney center patients come
by uber and buy other vehicles where
they need a little more time to get out
of their car so this kind of works for
them in this configuration but for the
residents themselves we're achieving
that kind of integrated community by as
I've said before having that shared
common space we're going to one fitness
room one front door one package room
where the residents will go to that
regardless of which building they're in
one community room kind of kitchen area
where they go so that we really try to
get that integration amongst the
residents and that's really not affected
by you know where how big the
opportunity center he is or where it's
located that that happens either way and
then lastly related to transit but the
parking differences for the different
options and how that would be addressed
so our code currently requires two
spaces per 1,000 square feet so
depending on the size would depend on
how many spaces were allocated for the
so that's what the code requires versus
what the use
choirs or believes they will require so
we have some discussions with health
point and Valley cities about their need
for between 40 and 60 spaces total so
some of those employees and some of
those are for you know patients and so
we have started conversations and
looking at a couple different options
looking at on-street parking potentially
looking at the metro overflow Park Park
& Ride lot across the street so by the
next to the skate park it's a shared use
of the park
the Tibbets Valley Park right now
looking to see if there's some some
opportunities to have a few spaces there
allocated so we know we're not gonna be
able to find you know another 20 or so
spaces in one location but we know that
we can find some other spots so that's
something that the staff will be working
on again if we move forward with that
the other thing is we don't know is how
how again how what the use of transit
exactly will be for their their
employees so this may reduce the need
for parking where other locations
there's not next our transit center
right we also don't know over time if
they're how parking usage and transit
usage will require this or allow this to
need less parking spaces so that's the
hope obviously be next to a Transit
Center anybody else well while you're
thinking so I I love hopefully truth be
told our my company has a long-standing
relationship with hoping I actually do
I'm a crier for our auction every year
that we do to benefit hope link and I
have actually sung Sinatra as a
fundraiser I sang the way you look
tonight and it's when I was I was
running for that other office we tried
to scrub it off the internet
she probably find it you probably find
it someplace on the internet but having
said that this community has talked
about a human services campus for very
long time and one of the reasons why we
don't have one today is because it was
seen that health and dental was an
absolute corners
to what we would want to do and of the
original plans that came through none of
them were able at the time to bring
forward a health and dental program and
it was just seen as absolutely essential
so I think this is a huge public benefit
for our community if it would be if we
were able to bring it in and so speaking
as one of seven one of four today but
what a seven I I would be interested in
seeing the option to going forward when
we reconvene in June
that's what member Goodman thank you
well I I think this is potentially just
a fantastic project and it's very very
exciting it's been very very exciting
all along we are this summer as I recall
coming upon two years that there have
been conversations about this at the
administration level staff level and at
the council level and so I know that
there's been a lot of planning that's
going on a lot of work and I know
there's a lot of excitement around it
and I'm just as excited as everybody
else however I I agree with and bothered
by the amount of time that's gone by
when we haven't been out in the
community and the last understanding was
that we would go out to the community
starting in January and the notion that
we would make a significant decision and
then not go out to the community until
July and then have the engagement be
around how to activate public spaces
doesn't feel right to me
so at this point in time I would be
leaning towards no additional cost
because I really think we got to be
before their community first before we
make that kind of a decision thank you
comes from ever right
so I'm gonna generally align with
Councilman councilmember Goodman it's a
lot of money there's a lot of moving
parts I don't think that that we really
understand what it is there seems to be
a lot of risk to me associated with it
and and I've I wish I could articulate
exactly why I'm uncomfortable and I will
work through that between now and the
end of this week and share that with you
but my intuition is telling me that
there's something here that doesn't feel
right with me
and so I'm a little bit apprehensive and
I will I will get my thoughts together
on that and share them with you between
now and the end of the week ask a
question about your the risk you
perceive for the for this so I can
understand that a ton of uncertainty and
you know self-admittedly between about
what it's going to look like you know
we're gonna get there what's it going to
cost what are the operating costs going
to be long term there's still a lot of
questions that I hear in the
presentation
yeah this comes member hunt so I I think
like councilmember Goodman I think this
is a very exciting and very important
project I think it will be one of a
example for the region and my my biggest
question remains how these different
uses will meld with the transit-oriented
nature of this development because I
think this this is an effort to get away
from using automobiles to get around
everywhere and I think potentially we
could align the use of the commercial
space and the nonprofit with the with
transit and that should be I think
really good for the community and I I
would think it would also be good for
the people that live in that building to
have a use that aligns with the transit
and so for that reason I
I'm not sure that I really understands
the difference between the different
uses in terms of that transit use and we
would would want to know more about that
I think that we have we have heard from
the Office of Sustainability that both
dental health and medical health and as
well as employment services and other
nonprofit services these are all needs
in the community and so I think there's
I think that there are multiple options
that make sense and then I'm interested
to hear how those options align with the
transit any other comments before we
close this does staff request any other
information from us oh all right
with that we will move on to ID zero 273
status update on city parcel with
Issaquah school district interest this
will be Keith Niven before us and I see
some of our school district friends are
with us as well
Thank You councilmember marts
good evening City Council keep living
and so last time we talked about this
was at a joint city council school board
meeting and we talked about the process
that we were going to go through to talk
about this piece of property and
potential surplus of this piece of
property and so where we are right now
is we're at the second council work
session on May 14th and this evening
we're gonna update you on where we are
on the issues that have been identified
so following this meeting that we had in
April we asked the City Council to
identify the topics and the issues that
they would like some further information
on and so what came out of that was
critical areas and geology traffic
issues we talked about trees and views
and so those were really the topical
issues that the council felt like they
wanted the school district and staff to
provide some more information on to help
inform whether or not the City Council
would be willing to potentially sell
this piece of property for a potential
I'm an elementary school so and going
back to the process slide that was the
previous one to this one we discussed
that this topic would both go to land
and Shore in June and to the services
committee in June and we talked about
whether or not we even needed this
second work session and council member
Ramos who didn't sit on either those two
committees said yes we should have this
discussion this evening so this is for
bill
so what I would like to start with and I
apologize for not getting this to you in
advance is the first thing that we've
accomplished since the last time we
talked about this is we identified 40
percent slopes are and so I have so what
this shows not very well on the slide I
apologize for that but where you can see
on your map is where the 40% slopes
start along the property both to the
north and to the west and that will that
those are the entireties so we had this
surveyed so those topographic lines were
actually surveyed by a surveyor so those
are accurate and so internal to the
property and this was one of the
questions that councilmember hunt asked
I believe last time was were there steep
slopes internal to the property and the
answer based on this topographic survey
is there or not so the second piece and
I'm going to invite Steve Crawford from
the school district to come up and share
what the school district has put
together the second piece is geo
technical information about the property
and the school district has done some
borings on the property since we had our
last meeting and I think even though
there's not written information to share
I think that mr. Crawford can talk about
what they know in terms of geology come
on up Steve not doing this by myself
Crawford welcome
Steve Crawford equesticle district
director of capital projects so initial
soils geotech investigation work was
done with basically on the top of the
hill huh I'm sorry could if you gather
Thanks sorry with backhoe trenches those
went to a depth of about 10 to 12 feet
and indicated the type of soil that you
typically find in glacial marine areas
there was some concern on the part of
the geotech engineer in there and
evaluation of the steep sloped areas and
that there was some presence of some
landslide areas to the northwest there
was an outcropping of a denser material
down towards the toe of the slope that
to them raised some questions about
slope stability the upper part that you
could ascertain the soil composition
from the backhoe testing was moderate to
loosely compacted material and the
presence of the denser material towards
the toe of the slope indicated a concern
to them that there was instability and a
severe seismic event and so they
requested that we drill some deeper
holes so that they can get a much better
picture of what underlies the upper
materials so that work was completed
last Friday so I don't have a
geotechnical report at this time but the
verbal report was that all three of
those borings indicated that the the
less dense material stopped at a depth
of about 30 feet and then it was solid
hard dense material below that and as I
said it's a leave their concerns with
regards to slope stability so there is a
softer material at the top to deal with
but overall the site should stay just
fine thank you very much you come to
remember good good question
so Steve you don't there's not a report
written report yet not yet but as soon
as we have it will forward it to you
they just finished the drilling Friday
thank you and what we had agreed to was
that we would have Golder and a Mac who
are the city's consultants review that
report when it comes in so the the
council when we asked for preferences on
level of kind of due diligence that we
would do a double peer review on that
information when it comes in so that
will be part of this next piece and as
soon as it comes in we'll have we'll
send that off to Golder and AMEC to do a
double peer review so the next piece
after after geology was trees so we've
executed a contract with tree solutions
incorporated to go out and do a complete
tree survey of the property as well as
to look at what the impact would
potentially be for downslope trees if
trees were removed off the off the
potential top of the hill that work
unfortunately treat arborists are really
busy right now so the best I could do
was get them to go out in June so I
doubt they'll be ready for land and
Shore in June maybe services in June but
we'll get that information to the
council as soon as that becomes
available and the school district did
have an arborist go up and look at trees
and I think Steve has some information
about what they found to share this
evening so the arborists review of the
tree and forest area is that the dead
and obviously affected trees are
impacted with laminated root rot it's a
disease that impacts fir trees and the
spores are typically present in glacial
moraine soils the trees when stressed
are not able to resist that and get
infected
it basically softens up the roots the
roots can't take the moisture the trees
exhibit the impact by dying from the top
down there's an area of about 17 trees
towards the north west corner the parcel
there's another smaller stand about
two-thirds of the way down the south
towards the South off of the west edge
of the property in the center area of a
depression there's a number of trees
that are impacted and he also noted that
there's obvious root rot impact to trees
off of Highlands drive and around to the
south
above i-90 as well so it's something
that's become fairly prevalent in the
area when we did the clearing for Pine
Lake middle school there were no trees
that had any visible signs of impact but
an assessment of the roots after we
pushed them over for the clearing for
the building about a third of them were
impacted with root rot so there are a
couple of different ways you can deal
with it if you want to stop the spread
of the root rot below ground and it
spreads whenever an infected tree root
touches a healthy tree root you clear
and remove the stumps for a distance of
50 feet from the outermost apparently
impacted tree so that creates a
basically dead area that the root rot
won't spread to trees further out as he
noted that there are pockets of the root
rot that will probably continue to
develop over the hillside and there is
no way to predict where or when that may
occur it generally takes one to two
years for the impact to start to show at
the top of the tree so
you don't know looking at a stand of
trees whether they're impacted or not
you know today they could be but it
wouldn't show for maybe a year maybe two
years but the likelihood is that it will
continue to spread on the hillside so
that raises some interesting questions
about how you go about dealing with it
do you clear trees and replant with red
alders or Cedars that are not
susceptible do you leave the dead trees
in place in part you're dealing with or
in most parts you're dealing with a tree
dairy that's on a steep slope so you
have to deal with the potential impacts
of removing trees on a dead slope and or
just lettin them die and stand which
probably accelerates the spread and
replant as you see dead areas appear so
that has an impact on view I think the
reality is that any type of a solution
when if the district were to move
forward on the property would require a
solution that involved the city because
the area of development is limited to a
relatively small area it's above in east
of the steep sloped area except in a
couple little areas one at the extreme
far north and a little tiny area towards
the south but the majority of the steep
sloped area and trees would still be on
city property and so you can't
realistically develop a solution for one
area without developing a solution for
the rest of the slope so so the good
news on this topic is because it is
complicated we're getting a second
opinion because our arbors will go out
and look at the same trees in the same
area so you know the good news is we'll
have at least two professional opinions
on that if there's
seems like there's two potential impacts
associated with this right one is on
views and the other is potentially on
hill stability and how do we get our
arms around so the solutions that would
address both potential impacts great
question I think when we have a better
understanding of the extent of the
potential diseased area I mean at some
point those trees are gonna come out
though they'll die and at some point
they'll not be providing the service
they are now to deflecting moisture off
the hillside part of I think what we
need to have a conversation about with
our geo Tech's is the issue of water
once we once we have this soils report
one of the conversations I'm going to
have with our geo Texas talk to me about
I'm what I heard from Steve my
translation of what I heard from Steve
was it's highly permeable soil so
loosely compacted it's gonna flow water
in really well and so the question is
you know if that's a similar soil on the
hillside you know what happens if the
tree canopy goes away so those are all
questions I think we're gonna have to
understand better to deal with at least
the loss of trees that's going to happen
inevitably whether this property gets
developed or not as it relates to views
when we get to that we can get to there
now is what we talked about with the
school district was to do kind of a 3d
imaging of this property and we're gonna
have to make some assumptions about how
many trees are coming down when we do
that so that the views are as realistic
as we can make them when that imagery
comes forward for the council's
consideration and I know that Steve and
talking with Steve one of the things
they wanted to understand was are they
going to get a resolution from their
board to move forward with this property
because that makes a big difference on
how much they spend
on putting together some of these things
that we're asking for right now and the
soil issue was one of the first hurdles
to get over I think so the last issue
that we haven't talked about yet and we
can go back and talk about all these
more if you'd like is traffic and there
were kind of a couple pieces that I
think the council asked for one was to
understand the traffic needs for
Discovery Drive I think you've heard
from some residents in West Highlands
Park that have expressed concern over
school buses and ambulances being on the
same roadway so I think we need to talk
about that a little bit and the other
thing was there was a request that there
would be some traffic counts done at
particularly Grand Ridge Elementary was
identified as one of the schools that
would be interesting to see what the
traffic generation rates are for one of
the school districts elementary schools
as opposed to just using the numbers out
of ite manual and so I think Steve can
address where they are right now with
traffic information
so look in that discovery drive the
traffic engineers assessment was that
discovery is that had West from ninth is
two lanes until the first signal light
where you turn left at eight to head to
the eastern entrance to the hospital and
the other Medical Center building beyond
eight it narrows to one lane until it
gets well it narrows to one lane his
recommendation would be that regardless
of whether there's any development on
this parcel that the roadway ought to be
two lanes to 7th Avenue at least which
is the road that leads south to the
emergency entrance to the hospital that
with one lane you have a potential for a
blockage and/or a delay in an emergency
vehicle if you have two lanes there's a
lane for traffic to pull over and allow
the emergency vehicle to pass beyond
that then it basically serves the
residential area that exists on the west
end of this Highlands area and
potentially school site along with the
one residential area that's under
construction immediately west of the
hospital so that kind of deals with
discovery as far as the school site
itself we did do traffic counting at
Clark and Grand Ridge to get the number
of vehicles in the AM and PM Peaks for
queuing that's a very poignant so we
have those numbers and the numbers of
vehicles the length of the queues and
the worst case situations in the worst
case at Grand Ridge you would be looking
at a distance of about 700 feet the
proposed design provides about sixteen
hundred and fifty feet of queue space on
the site off of city streets so I think
that realistically the pickup drop-off
traffic would be accommodated Grand
range is a little interesting and that
there's a hundred and twenty kids that
it
and the basic are the before and after
school care program so there's about 120
kids that generally are dropped off
before school and are not part of the
general population that arrives shortly
before the bell the typical peak for
school traffic in terms of queuing and
potential backup is in the afternoon
when the parents arrive sometimes a half
hour before school gets out to queue up
at the space closest to the front door
or at the end of the line and wait for
school to end the mornings generally not
much of an issue because they generally
arrive in sort of a onesie twosie
fashion dropping it off in two-part
question that I have on this is I
appreciate this verbal report we'll get
some kind of document to go along with
this yeah Keith is nodding his head yes
okay other questions okay thank you
questions in general for Keith or anyone
else no good for now so I'll just to
clarify again a little bit on this
question about trees and slopes so it
seems to me that you'd have one kind of
plan if you were warehouser and you had
a forest full of Doug firs and you
wanted to reduce you know minimize the
impact to the rest of your Doug first
and then you have a potential different
answer if you want to maintain canopy at
its fullest while dealing with something
and you might have yet a third answer
that is if you want to maintain slope
strength as much as possible while
dealing with an infestation of this root
rot so you know it's going to be
important to understand that the facets
of that that have to do with maximizing
slope stability and the facets that have
to do
with addressing canopy and the extent to
which they're complementary and the
extent to which they're not
complementary that reasonable question
in my part absolutely you know I think
that what ends up happening on the slope
and the trees there will be a way to
program it for an outcome that we want
to optimize so in other words you know
it may very well be that we decide that
the first thing we want is to establish
a new tree species on that hillside that
will grow so that in ten years you know
whatever building gets built there is
completely shielded by a new tree stand
that is not affected by the existing
disease it could be that we decide that
we wait for the existing trees to die
and then we plant and then there's that
impact is you know 10 15 years from now
so yeah we'll be able to I think wait
our priorities if we decide to go down
that road with the school district at
some point I realize there's a real art
to it in my house in Minnesota we had
hybrid poplars which I think only lasts
about 30 years but in 10 years they're
like a hundred and twenty feet tall yeah
I mean they just they grow like bad
weeds yeah yeah so anyhow I'll be
interested to see that cottonwoods yeah
they're questions from other council
members we've done Oh
councilmember hunt um I think I maybe I
just didn't hear so the the geotech work
though is completed and so the borings
are done their consultant AES I will be
writing up a report
so they'll they'll write down their
findings identify what soils they found
in their cores and then we'll be able to
allow our consultants to review that and
they'll be able to discuss whether they
agree on that site stability conclusion
that Steve alluded to earlier that your
question was this was okay so was the
state site stability conclusion was that
the conclusion of that kind
company that you just mentioned so
Steve's understanding of that he does
not have the report yet is that the
conclusions are that the geology is
stable all right any other questions
with that I will ask if any members of
the public wish to speak to this issue
this evening
I guess my first question to the owners
of these homes know what they're dealing
with kids the latest version of the plan
that I've seen anyway is the roads
circling the site so there'd be a road
earlier versions showed a nice strip of
trees which we're not going to survive
anyway so now there's a road right at
the western boundary of or the eastern
boundary of the school potential school
site I think in terms of trees and all
we're looking at I don't I see an
arborist is you know but we're really
looking at a forester and and it's
somebody that's gonna be looking at this
hillside for the long term in terms of
what trees what trees need to come down
which trees need to go in and
replacement and it's not it's not easy
those soils do drain they don't hold
much water so you've got to deal with
that and we've been messing around with
the hydrology in that area for decades
now you know Camp Creek was flowing
before yeah before they did anything
when that was 40 acres up or the
hospital was DNR forests there and Camp
Creek was flowing and there was there
was evidence there of old piping and all
the rest at Camp Creek that's all of
course gone when it blew out but so
there's definitely Springs and all of
that that's going on the hillside we
also know that Reid the guy that had the
that over excavated the gravel pit where
Home Depot is and went down into the
water table there and that was quite a
violation achieve was just quite easily
got away with he was going to excavate
the land just north of this of this
property and turned out that the soils
there was gonna be gravel and he did
find out going down fairly quickly that
they gravel disappeared and they got
into other material and he abandoned the
effort to do that so it's not
unsurprising that this property maybe
has a different different surface than
it does down below
King County is dealing a lot with forest
lands that have root rot that they are
replanting because they're going to
continue them to be in forest lands it's
a common problem so there's people out
there that are dealing with root rot
issues in the long term one of the
problems with root rot in this area is
we're going to be having these
potentially trees with compromised roots
very close to buildings in schoolyard in
that are we comfortable having right at
the top of the hill cutting down most of
that forest and that's actually those
trees and then leaving trees right next
to a school site and which of those
trees are safe to leave right there
fully exposed to the south winds and
also the this the more difficult problem
is almost the east wind which we get
from the pressure differential between
Puget Sound being low Eastern Washington
being high and that's one of the roofs
get blowing off of Snoqualmie Ridge and
significant damage has happened in the
early days of Issaquah Highlands with
three trees that were left at some of
the near the wetlands were blown to the
the west by the east winds so there's
it's not a cinch plus you're highly
visible there to the southwest winds
there's a lot of work that needs to be
figured out about that traffic there's a
whole bunch of entitlements to the land
that was part of Issaquah Highlands to
the east there and we have to fully
understand their entitlements and the
traffic that that would generate
remember they've done their seat before
that they did the four to one and a lot
of other things and earned that traffic
this property is not doesn't hasn't
earned anything in terms of traffic and
the rest and it's not been there's no
SEPA yet and we don't know how that's
gonna work the biggest problem is we're
trying to build a huge elementary school
up there and it's going to require lots
of us saying yeah there'll be some kids
that can walk to it
but a lot of the kids that go can't go
to this Grand Ridge school are on the
Geist are right real close to Green
Ridge school but they would have to
cross ninth and Highlands drive to get
to this school they're gonna be bused so
by going to this large school which they
need classrooms admittedly we're
increasing the traffic we're increasing
them the size of the buildings the
heights of the buildings and the parking
the latest deal is to put all the
parking underneath the building which
sounds kind of nice in some ways but at
the same time we're is going to be our
community part for the western part of
the Highlands there's only parking
underneath their building that's not
going to be available all the time what
public access will there be to the
playground in some of those facilities
outside of the school day thank you for
your comments anyone else wishing to
speak to this this evening heard a plus
one in the audience anybody else and I
believe that we are adjourned thank you
very much at home and a great evening
you