good evening we're on the
air it's
August 20th tonight's meeting is the
development commission first item of
business tonight is a review and
approval of minutes from May
7th are there any additions or
corrections to the
minutes chair I'll entertain a motion to
accept the
minutes approved moved and seconded all
in favor I
opposed minutes are
approved tonight we're having a public
meeting it's not a public public hearing
a public meeting tonight and then on the
3rd of September it'll be continued and
it's an effort to get
information and understanding and to ask
questions about the proposed cost code
development
plan
um if you would like to comment or ask
questions I ask you to sign up on the
sign up
sheet and depending on how many we have
signed up we'll try to somewhat
potentially curtail lengthy comments or
discussions just get your points across
ideally like maybe five
minutes of questions or comments and
then we'll move
on
so the staff will start the project Lucy
good evening um I first would like I'm
Lucy slowman land development manager
from DSD and I'd like to introduce um
two other uh City staff people who may
be um helping answer questions this
evening Keith nien economic development
director and Sheldon Lynn um Public
Works director they may have some
opening introductory
comments
okay thank you Lucy
uh as stated my name is Sheldon Lyn I'm
the Public Works director for the city
of isqua and before you is a meeting to
discuss and be presented the Costco
development agreement land use uh land
plan and the like and as a piece of
information the the schedule of this uh
agreement and land plan is driven in
part for reasons of financial aspects of
trying to get some grant money from the
state of Washington in which the
timelines and deadlines for those
applications and information associated
with it are the end of September so just
wanted you guys to be aware that the
deadlines that are uh or I should say
the process schedule that's laid in
front of you is a resultant of the
city's need to acquire money from the
state to help fund the major road
improvements associated with the
agreement and so if there's other
questions you know about that I'm happy
to answer
them um and I'm going to reserve I talk
a lot so I'm going to try not to um and
I'll Reserve most of my five minutes for
later Mr chair um what I would like to
do is because I and I haven't seen luc's
presentation so I don't want to kind of
repeat anything that she's going to
present to you guys but one of the
things that I think is of importance is
that this development
agreement the um property owner chose to
work within the central isqua plan um
recently adopted standards as opposed to
reone to Urban Village like many of our
other um development agreements have
done so that's I think a very key point
and I want you guys to kind of keep that
in the back of your mind as the
presentation goes through because that
affects a lot of not only the content
here but how we looked at it as
well for the people people in attendance
and those glued to their television at
home um again it's it's a a public
meeting we're here to get information we
are not taking a vote
tonight uh on the September 3rd meeting
uh we are being asked to make a
recommendation to
councel and we won't do anything more
till then so you'll have a chance to
speak tonight and in two weeks and also
to make written statements to the city
as well thanks Lucy go ahead thank you
so um as we've repeated numerous times
tonight we're here to talk about the
land plan and the master site plan
Amendment for
Costco um as um the chairperson
identified um next meeting you will be
asked to make a recommendation to
Council on three pieces one is the land
plan as part of the development
agreement second is um Master site plan
amendment to remove the master site plan
from the Costco
property and third by implication the
relevant elements of the development
agreement so I'm going to tonight that's
really what my focus is is to kind of
review and frame the land plan and the
staff report to talk about um the
development agreement and the relevant
elements and to talk about um the
amendment to the master site
plan and I want to let you know that
that um this is uh relatively informal
and um my presentation is relatively
long because this is a lot of material
so please feel free to interrupt and ask
questions as we go
along so I'm going to give you a little
context I think most of us know it but
um it's always good to have sort of an
introduction um this is the general area
of um the Pickering place in which
Costco's um property is located uh the
yellow box highlight
um that Pickering place in specific
although this is not the exact boundary
to the east is isqua Creek um major
environmental element to the north um uh
we have significant roads to the north
uh as well as Lake samamish State Park
um East Lake samamish Parkway is another
significant roadway connecting to I90 um
a more minor street is 221st Place of
course I90 to the South sr900 to the the
west and I also want to point out that
um although it it is no longer a part of
Pickering place um Pickering Barn is um
adjacent to all of this and is
approximately in the location of the
sort of smaller dotted
box um the map on the left uh the blue
outline shows the actual boundary of
Pickering place with um Costco's
property in Orange and salmon um just to
give you a couple of uh highlights of
that the um numbered buildings here are
the three existing Office Buildings um
one two and three in the order in which
they were occupied and built uh the
retail Warehouse is up here I put a
giant X through this because since this
aerial photo was taken the Wetland was
um removed and mitigated uh on adjacent
property um
and in the south east area is the the
trading building as well as uh since
again since this photo was taken a uh
five-story parking garage that um is
either just completed or just about to
be
completed so I'm just going to give you
a few quick images um many of these
buildings are familiar but just in case
I think it's uh good to know uh the
buildings that are part of the Costco
property of course there's the warehouse
um which I think many of us visit uh
across the street is is building number
two um which is one of their Office
Buildings then um building number one
which is the first one they
occupied um number four is this new
parking garage you can see on kind of
the right side the Wetland here and
located here that screens it from the
road um building three is the furthest
to the south of Long Lake Drive and the
newest building and then the Trade
building um as Sheldon mentioned one of
the drivers for the development
agreement is the master Transportation
financing agreement or
mtfa so I I just have two kind of
introductory slides on the vehicular
circulation um because that is a big
part of the development agreement um
there are certain roads that are
currently in place some are publicly
owned some are privately owned um for
most of our purposes that um isn't
really an important distinction um
probably of more interest are the New
Roads shown in green that will be added
um there are other places but this is
the most significant one uh that will
connect across isqua Creek to East Lake
samamish and provide a more direct
connection to
I90 so now I'm going to get sort of to
the meat of the land plan um the
structure of the presentation is around
the chapters of the central isqua um
development and design standards which
is abbreviated as
cidds um in contrast to CIP which is the
more policy type
document so um the first chapter uh is
the zoning uses and standards and the
current campus is located within the
urban core Zone um the development
agreement would entitle Costco to an
additional
1,500,000 square feet on top of the
um uh square footage they already have
this would predominantly be office uses
but up to
250,000 Square fet could be used for um
retail or other employment generating uh
land uses the new buildings not the um
those in association association with
the werehouse but primarily The Office
Buildings could be between three and 10
stories tall which which is consistent
with um The Heights Allowed by Central
isqua and this would meet the minimum F
of
055 did you have a
question I had a question you said
employment generating so it couldn't be
residential right so that's an important
um point about the development agreement
residential is allowed in the urban core
Zone um Costco could do Residential if
they chose to but at this point the
traffic analysis has all been around
retail and office so there would need to
be um a bit of additional analysis
associated with residential we're
completely supportive of them providing
residential it's just not quite all the
analysis has been done to accommodate
that great
thanks um setbacks and build to lines
are also covered in chapter 4 but be
they're also regulated by chapter 11 I'm
going to wait and talk about it in that
section
um density bonus is in chapter five The
Proposal um potentially could exceed the
base height of 48 ft and so the proposal
um provides a combination of land
dedication tdrs and payment to address
density bonus
requirements chapter six um as I said
roads are a big part of this and so
there are several points I'd like to
make around um circulation facilities
associated with this proposal one is
that in the central isqua standards um
it shows the streets uh within Pickering
place as being core streets um the
development agreement uh incorporates a
modification or adjustment um in the
lingo of um the central isqua standards
to the core Street standard and there
are three aspects of it that are being
proposed to be modified and um I've
listed them but you can also kind of see
them in this table down
here one is that sidewalks are proposed
to be reduced by 2 feet from 8 ft to 6
feet on street parking is eliminated and
a center turn lane is added um so here
are some of the uh thinking behind that
um when you read the description of core
streets uh it assumes that the buildings
will set be set at the back of sidewalk
and that's part and between the location
of the buildings and the types of uses
that are um anticipated in the urban
core the streets were wider um however
Central issaqua also acknowledges that
for office uses it may be necessary for
security and private privacy reasons
that buildings be set back from the
sidewalk and um Costco has um proposed
to do that and so um we feel that the uh
8 feet is not as unnecessary in that
circumstance um in terms of the on
street parking that was um long
discussion um we really value on street
parking um at the same time we're trying
to um fit uh an adopted standard into a
site with existing buildings and
facilities and also keep the streets
narrow and we were um Costco's uh
traffic consultant identified that uh
given the traffic patterns the use of
underbuilding parking that it would be
necessary to have a center turn lane and
in doing so uh in addition to the on
street parking the streets began to get
quite
wide so um that was the that was the
suite of um adjustments that are
proposed within the development
agreement for streets um and I just want
to note that um 6 feet is fairly
standard sidewalk width for other
streets within Central isqua so it's not
narrower than um streets elsewhere in
the circulation facility
standards and the um bicycle Lanes will
help make a more complete bicycle
circulation system within Pickering
place in terms of how these improvements
will be um constructed um they will
happen incrementally in phases as
various buildings are completed um that
is being worked out um still being
negotiated with Costco and will be
located in the master trans
Transportation financing
agreement
okay so um there's a condition number
two in the staff report um relates to
the uh incremental
construction the incremental
implementation of the entitlement will
include completing The Pedestrian
circulation system including sidewalks
on both sides of the roads consistent
with the improvements shown in the
mtfa um development agreement exhibit H
however during future land use Andor
construction permit review the applicant
May request an administrative adjustment
of Standards consistent with the
provisions and procedures of the
cids did you have a
question yeah so I'm going to make sure
I understood the last go to the next
next slide this so the incremental or
the phased implementation is what this
is referring to of the project and so
it's talking specifically about you know
the kind of the the improvements related
to the roads and sidewalks Etc and I was
thinking about are there other public
amenities that the timing is going to be
important depending upon how the project
phases and and should those amenities be
identified and implementation timing be
um prescriptive and maybe a little less
so and I again since this is very high
level conceptual design at this point
but it seems that that's going to be an
important factor I think in how phase
development happens so that it makes
sense and so that some of those
amenities are brought online as the
project moves ahead when it comes to the
uh public
amenities okay and you're thinking of
the public men amenities not necessarily
the public amenities in association with
the streets yes okay great I
just things like that okay and I'll
touch on that when I get to community
space I hadn't thought about that that's
a great question
thank um the second piece of the uh
chapter six um circulation facilities I
wanted to touch on was block length um a
big part of central isqua is to try and
create a very pedestrian friendly fine
grain pedestrian Network
um and that's somewhat of a challenge in
this area um for the office area we have
existing shared use routes which include
um the Pickering Trail between isqua
Creek and the buildings which exist now
and the um Pickering Pond Trail both of
which are show shown as shared use
routes in central isaga um plan and
standards there will also um there
either are or will will be these
sidewalks along streets um as part of
that standard so in a sort of north
south section um or north south
orientation we have our pedestrian and
bike facilities at about the frequency
that's anticipated by Central
isqua but um as we look at East West
connections you can see that there's not
going to be a lot of through streets
because between the pond and the creek
it's just relatively difficult and maybe
not even appropriate to make um the kind
of frequency of connections that the
plan anticipates and so um part of our
discussion was to look at well how can
we provide regular connections between
uh the street Lake Drive and these two
Trail systems shared use routes that
already
exist so
um obviously we can connect between
buildings such as shown in these kind of
longer um dashed lines um and along here
as
well however those um connections are
not quite at the frequency that was
anticipated in central isqua so part of
our discussion with Costco was around
how to get um a frequency that's
consisted with consistent with the
standards and
um one of the solutions that we came up
with was to provide connections through
through the
building now those could be arcades and
arcades might be um if you think of that
as like a you know open ground floor
passageway um those those could be open
to the public um but they could just as
much be an Atrium or some other uh kind
of facility that wasn't open to the
public um Costco does maintain a secure
campus um and their buildings would not
be generally open for the public so um
we had to discuss uh the implications of
that one of the things I think there
were a couple of factors that made us
comfortable with using this tool in this
circumstance I don't think it would work
um in many other if any other places of
Central isqua and that is um allowing
the through building connections to
stand in for um more open publicly
accessible routs part of that is because
um even though even with the street
system connect Ed out to East Lake
samamish with the new road
um down here um we still think that the
majority of people that will be in this
area and that would be connecting
between the road and the trail will be
isqua I mean isqua Costco employees and
their visitors and they have passes that
would allow them to use the building and
we're also as I said not going to have a
street um grid that connects in the same
way that it does in the rest of central
isqua so we feel that the frequency and
ability for the majority of people to
make these regular connections meets the
intent of central
isqua uh in the warehouse block um it's
it's really a super block um it's about
600 by a th000 feet which is um
significantly larger than is anticipated
in central isqua but the reality is that
as long as the warehouse and the um
surface parking occup that block it
really isn't possible to break it down
into the kind of fine grain grid that
Central isqua uh envisioned when that
block when and if that block is
redeveloped so at the at this time the
um circulation pedestrian circulation
through that block is really um I think
a almost complete or complete um system
of there's a roote along the front of
the store that connects from samamish um
down to like drive and then there's also
another route that connects between 10th
and 11th along
here any questions before I go
on so there's a really long condition
associated with
this
incrementally sure since we're yeah yeah
kind of do this an informal approach so
what you just described as far as trying
to you know the the cross block
connection or mid block connections and
connections to the trails Etc and the
point that you said well most of the
people here will be is Costco employees
and so that should be fine and so I
guess a little bit of concern about that
because what it starts to feel like is
if you're not a Costco employee you're
not welcome here and this is a part of
the city that we want to invite people
to and so my thinking is what are the
things that we're doing with this
project or with this
development agreement that would
actually bring other people to this part
of the city to enjoy the features that
the city provides there's a trail city
is going to have roads sidewalks it's
going to be Landscaping there's a pond
there's there's a number of things that
that people could come to enjoy but if
it starts to feel like well this is
Costco's space don't come here and I
don't think that's what the corporation
wants to have happen either but it it
seems like some thought needs to be
given
to um make making it inviting for all
not just for people that work in those
buildings so let me just remind you um
because um it's been a while since we've
done this and it is something of a new
process as we um go through this evening
and we receive questions and comments
and concerns from the commission and the
public we will um prepare we're that
we're writing these down and we prepare
a briefing response memo so sometimes we
have answers this evening and sometimes
it's best to you know sort of um think
it through and give you a more concise
um answer so I made some notes and we'll
include that in the briefing response
memo so just I he's kind of spurred me
on to thinking I just want to make sure
I understand the the through block
passages are are lit are really public
accesses but the through building things
the expectation would be that those are
probably not open to the public that
they are secure for the Costco employees
is that correct so these ones that like
this one right and this one those are
outside right okay so it's these sort of
um lighter or shorter Dash lines that
would go through the building so it's
kind of every other now this is a
concept we're not saying it's going to
be built exactly like this but this is
the kind of framework that we reviewed
um this assuming we could achieve
this
so um here's the
condition incrementally build a
connected pedestrian system between Lake
Drive and the shared use routes behind
the buildings Pickering Trail and
Pickering Pond Trail consistent with the
intent of section 6.2 pointa if the
buildings are longer than 300 ft open a
arcades enclosed through building
atriums or elements that serve a similar
purpose will be provided to implement
the block length requirements of SE
section
6.2.8 the land plan was evaluated and
approved with the following level of
connectivity being determined to be
consistent with the intent of section
6.2.8 at approximately the frequency
shown in the staff report
illustration one outside through block
passages between buildings and two
internal building passageways via main
entrances from Street side plazas and
Trailside plazas which will have access
Limited to Costco employees and invited
guests however the staff report
illustration is a concept and will
likely not be constructed exactly as
shown entries into and exits from the
buildings to the plazas may not be
internally connected via a straight line
though the route through the building
should be direct and comprehensible for
Costco
employees so the third element um
associated with the circulation
facilities chapter are sky Bridges which
we've um placed under additional
facilities which is a section in that
chapter um however Sky bridges are not
listed under additional facilities um
that's a new element um to Central isqua
um Costco currently has two um one is
located here and one is located here um
in considering uh the use of Sky Bridges
and continuing those um
staff's uh thought was that um we need
we need to be respectful of the secure
campus complex that Costco has and yet
we want a frequent pedestrian um
external system that connects between
the trails and the street if we didn't
allow Sky Bridges then we would likely
have more monolithic buildings that
would not allow that frequency of
connection and the sky so the sky
Bridges seem like a good balance between
acknowledging their need for a secure
campus and providing these um between
building connections at ground
level
um if you read the transmitt along with
all the other many many pages we sent
you um you may be aware that there's
there was a draft development agreement
um online um it was from July 7th uh
next week there will be an updated
version of the development agreement um
that will be available and I assume
you'll be sent a link to that um that
contains you know ever since that draft
from July 7th came out we've been
continuing to negotiate and work through
issues and one of them um one of the
things that we've talked a lot about are
sky Bridges I'm not going to list all
the different criteria that are in there
but there were a couple of pieces I just
wanted to provide to you um one was that
um there could be one sky bridge between
each pair of buildings which is what is
shown on the land plan to the right and
kind of circled with little um yellow
ovals and that there could be two uh Sky
Bridges crossing the wideway and the
rest of the criteria really around
design and I won't read those to you you
can see them in the development
agreement um next
week um and there was a condition
associated with Sky Bridges as well in
addition to the review criteria and
standards in development agreement
section 12 the design and review of Sky
Bridges will use the images and captions
provided under chapter six of the staff
report and in the imagery staff report
attachment 4 as illustrative
guidelines so um chapter seven is
community spaces there are um four
Community spaces um Associated um as
shown on the plan and there's one
associated with each building um what
the land plan really identifies is the
location of the community space um that
would be provided with each building it
indicates that it meets the minimum size
um and uh in thinking about your
question Mike um it would be th those
are required in association with those
buildings so the timing would be
associated with the construction of the
building um but there may be other
amenities that come up over the course
of the evening so please identify
those um the other thing that the land
plan shows about Community spaces is
that a lot of the or all of the existing
spaces such as the amphitheater and such
are being maintained as part of the plan
going
forward parking um I'm going to look at
this kind of ass in association with
each uh use for the office parking um
the garage which has already been
constructed and has five floors U
located over here is one of the primary
ways that they're parking the project uh
the plan also includes the addition of
two more floors for a total of seven
floors in the parking structure uh which
has been designed to accommodate that
each of the new buildings 4 a 4B 5 and
six um each have underbuilding parking
sh one to two levels um the parking in
front of buildings one and two remain um
since these buildings aren't being
changed uh they aren't being required to
um modify those there is a small surface
lot um a new small surface lot being
proposed over here um overall um the
parking associated with the office Falls
between the minimum and maximum range um
and really uh implements a big part of
the vision of central isqua by
eliminating the use of surface parking
and moving towards structured parking as
the way to um address parking needs
with uses going
forward uh the warehouse uh is um
because it isn't really being
significantly changed it may have some
expansions uh it is um continuing to
rely on Surface parking um if and when
it's redeveloped that might change um
there is one adjustment in the
development agreement that I want to
point out to you and it's um a size of
parking stalls versus a maximum
ratio uh in the development well in
central isqua standards the standard
parking stall is 185 by 9 ft Costco is
asked to be able to have a parking stall
10 by 20 ft and we were willing to do
that because we recognized that loading
the amount and size of material that
often comes out of the store um
necessitates being able to get between
cars and um we understand that need um
Cusco also asks to be able to um exceed
the maximum and um continue to use five
stalls per thousand square feet um in
thinking about this we said if you want
to do the 5 for thousand stalls you'll
need to use the standard Central isqua
stall St size if you want to have four
per thousand stalls you can use the 10x
20t stall size and what this is is um
basically is a wash in terms of
impervious surface so our we'd have a
little more parking stalls or a little
larger parking stalls the amount of
impervious uh surface associated with
each of them would be um fairly
consistent
um does that change anything required
the number of stalls per business that
we talk about
routinely well this only for the
warehouse so um for the Costco warehouse
I understood but I mean
that with the size of that building
they're supposed to have X number of
stalls yes does this change
that do not it does not change the
minimum it could potentially change the
maximum for a building of that size the
maximum ratio would be four stalls per
thousand square ft of
store and so they can decide if they
want to go up to five per thousand which
is not normally allowed for a store this
size they would have to use the smaller
stall size
okay thank you
yep um landscape um when I was writing
the staff report I kind of focused on
um you know that there's not a lot of
detail at this kind of high conceptual
level about
landscape um but when I was working on
uh this presentation I I began to kind
of rethink that a little bit there there
are four topics that are covered in this
chapter um landscaping for streets
landscaping for parking lots landscaping
for Community spaces and tree retention
and
protection um I realized that the on the
street trees and um planting strip
parking um there's already a lot of that
there some of it may change as streets
are incre incrementally rebuilt but
that's a relatively prescriptive
standard I mean there's certain kinds of
trees provided every 30 feet and so uh
without knowing EXA uh having pictures
or specific drawings we still have a
pretty good sense of what that might
look like and feel like and uh same with
parking lots there's you know you have
to have 10% landscaping and one tree per
six stalls etc etc and that's a
relatively um prescriptive standard uh
that would be um used for any changes or
additions to the uh Warehouse parking
lot since there aren't any really
parking lots with the Office
Buildings so the two that we have a
little bit less information about one is
the community spaces however um if
you've looked at the imagery and I'm
sure um Steve bulock from mulany G2 will
speak to this tonight um there are
images included in the um packet that
you received uh kind of uh indicating
the sort of character and um feel of the
plazas that they um imagine doing as
well as the plazas that they already
have um and tree retention again is a
relatively prescriptive process um they
will either meet the tree retention
requirements um for the parking lots
because that's what they're
predominantly taking out they're not
taking out big fields of grass and trees
or um they can um apply for an
adjustment of Standards using the
criteria that are um set up in the
central isqua standards so there's no
change associated with
that so here's here's a mey one um
chapter 11 is site design um you may
remember when we were looking at chapter
4 I mentioned that setbacks and um build
two lines that we were going to talk
about it later um in chapter 11 are many
of the requirements for setbacks Street
walls um build two lines um there are
very uh Central isqua establishes um
some very specific requirements um you
can go up right behind the sidewalk or
right up to the property line uh the
most you can set back is 10 ft um you
have to have 75% of a parcel or block
with a street wall
Etc um in looking you know one of the
advantages of looking at a piece of
property um with the standards is really
understanding how do those two things
work together and we recognized um in
looking at the Costco property that
there were several challenges uh one is
that Central isqua uh either as it is
built now or is is it as it is intended
to build out will have a relatively
rectilinear or geometric Street grid
that um is not the nature of the streets
that um were built with Pickering place
also um we don't really see uh
relocating the streets to try and force
a street grid onto this given the number
of buildings and Facilities that have
already been built um the street Network
um can't really be connected as I
mentioned with the creek and the pond so
you don't end up with blocks that make
it easy to apply these sort of
prescriptive standards um about Street
walls and um we also discovered that um
there really aren't Parcels for instance
all the buildings uh through or all the
property through here is on one big
parcel so it it became difficult to kind
of imagine how this would uh how we
would meet those requirements without
having um kind of continuous curval
linear buildings which although they
proposed one curval linear building uh
it did seem like a lot to assume that
every single building would be built
that
way so instead what um we are proposing
is to meet the intent of these as
opposed to so meet them more as a
performance standard than a prescriptive
standard um and that would be by
creating Street walls to the extent that
it's practical and feasible to provide
frequent consistent strong edges to the
public realm and that Community spaces
and buildings be built to complement
each other and to reinforce um the
street I thought before I went on to the
condition I'd give you a chance if you
had any
questions or
thoughts
okay so um the image on the right uh is
the red indicates some of the places uh
this is in the staff report and
indicates some of the uh refinements to
the land plan that we would anticipate
to um comply with the that kind of
intent um staff report condition number
four is really long so I don't think I'm
going to read it to you um but the
intent is to really establish uh is to
capture that intent so it's um
predictable for both Costco and City
staff and the commission going
forward
buildings um I know with uh the last
permit that came before you you know a
big part of your review and interest and
concern is the character of the
buildings we don't have specific
building designs however we have six
existing buildings and we also have uh
the imagery that's been provided to you
that begins to capture the kind of
materials detailing design um that
Costco has used in the past and intends
to use going forward um so uh From
staff's perspective that um we thought
set a good um sort of threshold for
moving forward and having a clear
understanding shared understanding of
what buildings would be like um there
was uh one element in the
um uh land plan that we did want to
clarify and that was around entries um
the uh red ovals indicate uh where the
land plan shows that entries might be um
and we're agreeing that um entries in
those General locations would meet the
intent of central isqua along with
either um potentially an arcade which is
what those Dash lines indicate or um a
employee only entrance um off of Lake
Drive so that there's kind of this axial
um Terminus at building six would um
have a door or something kind of
welcoming even if it was not available
to the general
public so the condition associated with
that um number five reads each new
building shall provide a primary entry
in into the building from the street
through though security May limit who
enters the building building six may
have its public entry from the pondside
plaza consistent with the
cidds however a staffon entry shall be
placed on Lake Drive drive and
positioned and designed to reinforce the
Vista and communicate that it is a
primary building entry unless an arcade
is provided approximately as suggested
in the land Plan Building one's entry
route from the street to the door shall
be reasonably redesigned during the
future land use and construction
permitting process for building six to
make the sequence consistent with the
central isqua design and development
standards as practical and reasonable
let me just touch on that last one I I
didn't mention that
this is building one and uh currently
and its entrance is over here and so you
can see that this area uh is being
changed which would potentially impact
the entry into building one and we're
just indicating that um additional
design and review would be necessary to
to make sure that that um the entry
sequence complies with the central isqua
standards
so that's the land
plan absolutely the condition or
the
okay
so I'm looking at understand
chall I
know 30-year
plan um but just a couple of elements
that jump out at me a little bit here is
we have I like the idea of connecting
those public spaces the lower the two
red dots at the lower part but as you
move up we've got a parking lot now
that's right up on the street that's
kind of not exactly what we're looking
for and as there's some way that we can
uh create a different experience along
that edge um that's maybe not parking
try to do something that moves out a way
or does something along that Frontage
because right across from that it's a a
plaza so you have this or or an entry
Plaza but right across you've got what
is a p or a Suburban surface parking lot
and that's not what we're looking for so
just these are some just observations
and trying to understand the intent and
how you're trying to meet that with the
challenges you're facing also The
Pedestrian Bridges and I think we're
probably going to talk more about this
that's a lot of pedestrian pulling the
pedestrians up off this off the ground
and running them across uh at Second
Story level it pulls all of that
activity up off the street
so um particularly those that cross the
public road so I I wonder if that's the
right solution at that level of
connectivity through pedestrian Bridges
um through all of the buildings
essentially you could enter one of these
buildings and not leave campus uh or
walk across all over campus here without
leaving a building and I I'm not quite
sure that's an outcome that's going
to
um be what we're looking for so just a
concern based on the the the use the ex
extensive use of pedestrian bridges on
this plan
great so the second piece I wanted to
touch on was the development agreement
um uh this is a new thing to the
development commission most of the ones
have gone through the Urban Village
Development commission so I want to
provide a little bit of introduction and
then walk you through some of the
components of the development agreement
um so the purpose of this development
agreement is you know reduced probably
overly reductionist is to um identify
this entitlement and the requirements um
that come along with making that work
and two of the big ones I wouldn't say
they're the only ones but two of the big
ones are the master Transportation
financing agreement so all the roads
that are necessary to um be able to
build the 1.5 million square feet um and
you'll hear me talk a lot about the mtfa
in a minute um and then the land plan
which is the piece that you're looking
at so um let me talk a little a little
bit more about those what is your role
in looking then at the development
agreement so we are not asking you to do
the kind of technical review that would
be necessary to look at the
mtfa um that is primarily a a council
financing Public Works financing and
transportation analysis document you're
of course welcome to give us comments on
it but that isn't an expectation that
you um have the um expertise and
understanding to uh dig into the
mtfa um and unlike many of the Urban
Village Development agreements isqua
Highlands Talis rally
Etc um this development agreement really
relies on Central isqua plan and Central
isqua standards so those documents are
enormous because they are creating their
own goals guidelines and standards for
going
forward this document this um
development and this entitlement is is
implementing the central isqua plan and
standards um so then what are we asking
you to do one thing is to do the kind of
planning review that the development
commission does you look at the land
plan and you provide us comments based
on the central isqua plan and standards
um just like any other land use permit
you review um also as part of a land use
permit
um you are often looking at the kind of
adjustments and interpretations that
staff apply when they're looking at an
actual piece of property with the
standards applied to it um in addition
uh Central isqua anticipated that a
certain level of flexibility would need
to be um used in the methods but not in
the objectives so part of what we're
asking is that you look at the
adjustments and interpretations that we
provided and give us feedback on whether
you think those are appropriate ones
um and you're then of course welcome to
comment on anything else that's in the
development agreement but those are
really the pieces um that are of
particular interest and importance to us
to hear from you
on so now what I'm going to do is run
through some of the adjustments and
interpretations that we've done you've
heard most of them through the staff
report but I just want to really call
these out so that they're clear to you
you um the first one is the floor area
ratio or f um how it was applied to this
project um one of the challenges that
comes with a PL does everyone know what
an F
is okay um so uh floor area
ratio there's a certain minimum and a
maximum floor area ratio that the
central isoa standards esta
establish and um we're looking at a
project that's going to be phased in
over a number of years on a single piece
of property so how do you know when do
you get to that minimum how do you know
if you getting enough um so what we
wanted was to create a level of
predictability upfront and so what we've
looked at is the property that they're
proposing to develop and the total
buildout the 1.5 million square fet as
well as the existing buildings that
exist on that property and whether they
meet um it at buildout we we are not
proposing to look at it at an
incremental level throughout the
buildout period so that's the first um
interpretation the second is density
bonus um it's a relatively similar issue
they are exceeding the um base height
which would trigger the need to provide
um density bonus um we have run a number
of scenarios for how they might build
out the property and um might phase it
and have uh arrived at um a certain
amount of square footage that would um
in as an average between these various
scenarios um be above the base height
and have used that as the basis for
calculating density bonus um and that's
they're providing land and money um as
part of that consistent with chapter
five
um setbacks and build to line there
isn't an interpretation that's included
in the development agreement it's in the
staff report it's the one I've already
um talked to you about but it's
referenced in the development agreement
so I just wanted to identify that since
it is in the document the document
references the staff
report sorry Lucy if I can back up just
one second absolutely so that that
calculation of the if I understand
understand it correctly it was 1.25
million in cash this
is back to the density bonus
plus I just want to make sure I had this
right is it
plus
167,000 square feet of open space I'm
gonna let Keith is that right that's
right okay it's those two things that
they
provide so um so we actually the the
version that's the second version 2.0 um
you know after we wrote that up I we
think that's the way that it's going to
get accomplished but basically what the
what what the CIP allows for is
basically the first third of the area
above four stories needs to be paid for
by cash the second 2third or the other
two3 the remaining 2/3 can be either
satisfied with an additional cash
payment or the provision of open space
or the provision of affordable housing
or tdrs and the only thing that's not
kind of under consideration right now by
Costco is affordable housing because
they're really not anticipating housing
at this point as part of the development
agreement so what it's going to say is
that they will provide some
combination of either money open space
or tdrs to satisfy that second 2/3 but
at the end of the day they will
basically compensate for 250,000 square
fet of office space above four stories
that's kind of where we landed thank
you so setbacks in Bill two were in the
staff report we already covered those um
another one was the adjustment to the
core Street standard which again we
covered in the staff report but the
actual standard is captured in the
development agreement so I just wanted
to identify that
that corporate ID signs um there aren't
any signs in the land plan so this
didn't come up but I just want to
identify um it as uh an adjustment which
is included in the development
agreement right now um a
building uh of whatever height can have
a wall sign up to 65 ft in height a
corporate ID sign is for significant
employ employer um motel or hotel or
hospital um and for a significant
employer you would have to have a
10-story building to have a corporate ID
sign Costco is asked to have one
corporate ID sign that they could have
on one of their buildings but that was
between the 65 and the 10 stories which
is essentially the maximum height um so
it would um that the adjustment is that
you wouldn't have to be 10 stories tall
but you would only get one um if it was
less than 10
stories uh another interpretation had to
do with the warehouse parking lot lights
um their lights are taller than are
allowed by Central isqua and standards
and so the question was at what point do
they have to bring them into to
compliance with the shorter pole Heights
um The Challenge isn't the shorter poles
it's having to rewire and relocate
everything in the parking lot to reach
the lighting levels and so there's
um you'll see it in the new development
agreement um a they can continue to use
a certain number of these lights until
50% of the parking lot is changed and
then they will bring that into
compliance Lucy can I um just add one
clarification so so as Lucy is putting
up this list and it's saying adjustment
or interpretation I just want to be
clear with you folks that right now
they're the development agreement is not
done obviously so these are proposed so
this is you know what we're doing is
we're inviting a conversation with you
guys on these things so if you feel like
we drew the line in the wrong spot you
know let's talk about that and see you
know if it needs some additional
thinking on our
part
I guess a question do you want all our
comments now or or if we have some ideas
on that at the end you can you can
certainly do it now so you if you don't
have to remember it but if you want to
wait till the end I'm fine too I I I'll
take them whenever you want to give them
great no I can I'll
remember I
bet um there's the re uh retail
Warehouse stall sizes versus the maximum
parking ratio which we already talked
about
uh and then this the ability to use Sky
Bridges um which is we consider an
interpretation so um the other piece of
the development agreement just to kind
of give you um a well-rounded
understanding hopefully um there were
certain elements in the uh development
agreement that we thought might be of
interest to you they don't directly bear
on your review but we thought that they
sort of relate to some of the things
that you think about um the entitle
piece we already covered that that
residential would uh require some
additional review to be
allowed um second is expansion areas um
I have a map on the next slide but I
just want to note that the expansion
areas are not all in the urban core some
of them are in the mixed use
Zone um I'm sorry to interrupt again no
that's no because I again back to the
employment
250,000 of employment oriented uses
because when I look at at the
development agreement it just says
250,000 may be utilized for non-office
uses and I don't remember reading
employment oriented in the development
agreement itself is that we're very
annoying that way that we keep writing
um so um that's that's the language that
we settled on because the non-office
uses would have allowed residential um
and we hadn't done the traffic analysis
that would be necessary so that was a
clarification that will it's yes great
that's a 2.0 thank
you so expansion areas um maybe before
you go through that I'm I'm back to the
far if you can drop back to that
included in the package you sent us was
this far calculation sheet and and I got
confused with the outline of the
property I didn't understand what that
was why that particular picture because
it includes an awful lot lot of stuff
that isn't Costco
property yeah that's the one right there
you just passed
it that it's a similar map but I think
that's it right there yeah and I I got
confused as what you were trying to tell
us with
this picture in regards to far
calculations
right
so um the uh Costco property is this
Peach and orange right um so the um I
didn't know why the rest of it was there
I don't know why you had that BL maybe
it's just me but I didn't know why you
had to have that stuff the whole
boundary in place I got confused so I'll
tell you I didn't draw this but I um uh
I'm not picking on the person who did I
think they were using um standard
graphic that they had used elsewhere
that just showed uh Costco's property
relative to other properties in the area
but okay but so all you're talking about
with this graph is just the the brown or
the orange or whatever the color that's
Pro okay thank you
yep
so expansion areas
the um white are the expansion areas
that Costco has proposed uh the red does
yeah shows up so the red is their
existing boundary and the white are the
areas that they have proposed as um a
potential expansion areas um but in and
this again is in version 2.0 that we
realized um that if they brought in all
200
48 Acres they would not meet the minimum
F so they are restricted to 45 Acres of
additional land that could be brought in
without um additional review to ensure
that we would meet the minimum
fa
I think we'll wait on a public until
after you're done okay um vested rights
um by this I mean um that the central
isqua plan and standards that are in
place at this time will be the plan and
standards used for the term of the
development agreement um this is
something that's allowed by the state
regulations and has been very commonly
done in the other development agreements
but it is one of the questions that um
Connie raised in her
letter permit
processing um I don't think this is in
I'm not sure which version was in 1.0
but I know in
2.0 um most of the permit processing is
the same as uh was adopted in central
isqua the one difference is that as they
bring in the building since you've
reviewed the land plan and made a
recommendation on it as they bring in
the actual buildings they will do a land
use permit if the building is over
150,000 Square ft it will come back to
the development commission but it'll be
more like a Community Conference rather
than a
decision so that's the proposal right
now is it also true then that a building
shown on here 10 stories tall there
would be no public hearing on it either
Community Conference or just open
hearing no if they brought in one of
these Office Buildings whether as if it
was over 150,000 sare F feet because you
may remember under 150,000 is
automatically administrative in central
isqua so if it's over 150,000 Square F
feet sorry turn it
off
um on the top button that's fine
sorry um if it's over 150,000 Square F
feet it would um come back to the
commission to you guys for input from
you and the public but the decision
would be made administratively so we're
we're getting the input but it's not a
commission decision is that for any
building or just ones not shown on the
land plan only for the ones shown on the
land plan because you have already had a
chance to comment on them if building
and thank you for asking that for
buildings over 150,000 Square ft that
are not shown on the land plant they
would go through the standard
process so it's only the ones that you
have had a chance to look at through
this process but they both get a public
hearing some you would get a more like a
public meeting or Community Conference a
chance for public input yes but you
would actually have a public hearing for
if it wasn't shown on the land plan it
would go through the standard process
which would include a public hearing
great okay
thank um the term of the development
agreement is 30 years um so the
components they would have an
opportunity to build out um their
buildings and use the regulations for
that period of
time um I also just wanted to point this
out because this is something that's
common in other development agreements
but um which you U may not have run
across before um which is that along
with the administrative adjustment of
Standards um if there is a request by
cost code to change certain things it
has to go back to council so there's a
list of sort of um I don't I can't the
name keeps changing major modifications
Council amendments something like that
but it's in the development agreement
and it's a list of things that if those
would are being changed like if they
want to use a use that's not listed in
urban core if they want to change the
mtfa if they want to um uh change things
associated with the F they would have to
actually go to council to be able to do
those so that's um sort of an overview
of the development
agreement another piece that you're
asked being asked to um comment or make
a recomend recommendation on is the
master site plan
Amendment so um why is Costco asking for
this amendment um when the council
passed Central isqua um plan and Central
isqua
standards
um uh to be able to use those Costco um
or anyone in Pickering Place cannot
develop really under the master site
plan because um there's kind of two
different approaches the height height
limits are significantly lower the
impervious surface is significantly
lower the parking is significantly
higher is three examples so to be able
to take advantage of the central isqua
approach um they are asking to
um uh eliminate the master site plan on
their
properties um one of Connie's questions
was um what is the city city giving up
um through
that generally speaking
um since the city uh in 2012 and 2013
adopted the two pieces of central isob
we feel like that was a decision that
was already made there was zoning and
all kinds of things that existed in this
area and the council has already made a
decision to move in this direction and
to apply that zoning and those standards
to this property and so we have not
really focused on what the elements of
the master site plan are because of the
change in
zoning there are uh another piece of
some of Yeah question
sure um so the the other properties that
are covered by and I don't know if it's
on a map here miss if it is for the
master site
plan um if other properties that are
covered by that plan asked to have the
plan eliminated from their properties to
apply the central isqua plan which is
the more contemporary planning of the
the city would that be I know you can't
you're not the decision maker on it but
would would that be something the city
would
promote because essentially the master
site plan for this particular area was
essentially done years ago under a
different set of standards and and
guidance by the council and their policy
right I mean for the same reason so that
that Master site plan is from
1987 and and so we generally consider
removing the master site plan from any
of the properties in Pickering place to
be kind of a housekeeping matter uh uh
because that zoning and those standards
have been applied there is a certain
process that they would have to go
through right um but uh it's not like
you would have to do a development
agreement to be able to have that and
we're talking about whether the
development agreement can um simplify
the process since this um to remove the
master site plan from from the for the
city's purposes now there's all kinds of
ccnr and private property agreements
which the city is not a party to but
relative to the master site plan permit
which was um approved by the city in
1987 we um view this just as a
housekeeping matter to eliminate that to
um uh allow Central isqua to move
forward right and that would be true for
any of the property okay and and just to
be clear since the council hasn't acted
on that yet we're assuming that's the
way that's going to go down but right
that that's part of the decision that is
going to run hand inand with this
development agreement is asking the
council to remove Costco from the master
site plan provisions of Pickering right
so when I say these things I'm just
describing staff's position okay I got a
question um so so we have this master
plan that's set in place and I guess uh
I'm kind of baffled why U this project
is coming up to the development
Commission for this amendment uh it
would seem to me that you probably want
to go to whoever approved the master
plan to make this adjustment and not
come to the development commission and I
don't want to sound real bureaucratic
about this because it's going to take a
long time to go through this but a lot
of effort was was put in to have this
master plan approved everybody agreed to
it all the folks were and I presume you
know went through a lot of hearing and
stuff like that to have it approved so
now you're making an exception and all a
sudden development commission is asked
to come up with a yay or no and some
amendments so I guess I'm I'm kind of
questioning why are we going through
this route this way and you know there's
a lot of things that you know we make
we're kind of agreeing to narrow the
sidewalk and you know the street or this
and that and parking lot you know
there's a lot of thoughts that went into
it and I have to give them credit for
coming up with that and to make the
change
now it just you know I just feel
uncomfortable about you know what I'm
seeing so far and again the point that
Mr Baron made was you know I don't see
any isqua folks being incorporated into
this master plan so it raises a flag to
me okay so
um the council was the body that
approved the master site plan in
1987 and the council would be the body
to eliminate
it um I'm not sure I I know I wasn't
around in 1987 working on this and I
don't know whether any of you were
around
um the
uh I I I want to kind of make a
distinction between two pieces there
there's how um Pickering Place developed
under the master site plan
um and then there is the approach um
that was applied to all of central isqua
with the new Central isqua plan and
standards
um this proposal is looking at how to
work with the existing pieces to bring
them more fully into compliance with the
new Central isqua
standards um when for instance I
mentioned that the sidewalk would be
narrower that's not the compared to the
it would at the sidewalk that is in
existence is I'm going to guess 5 feet
wide which is narrower than the reduced
standard that we're
proposing so there's what's actually on
the ground because the the street
standard that was used to build
Pickering place is different than the
street standard that's in um Central
isqua can I try yeah so um so the master
site plan um was kind of the um it was
the ancestor of development agreements
so basically State legislation um the
state legislature created the
development agreement to basically
standardize what localities were using
to do these kind of contract rezones and
so the problem the issue we have with
the Pickering Master site plan is it has
no termination point and so you know
these development agreements we talk
about years like you know let's do this
for 30 years but at the end of that time
basically the rights that are conveyed
through that agreement um don't have
quite the same standing as the rights in
Pickering so the City attorney has said
that basically you know you can think
about it almost as a land use right the
master site plan is if you owned land
within the Pickering place um Master
site plan area and so the city can't
relinquish those rights um well we could
but we don't want to necessarily get rid
of any rights that might have been
conveyed through the master site plan
approval so what we're doing is we're
allowing the property owners within
Pickering to elect to redevelop their
property and be kind of managed under
the new CIP standards but it takes their
asking to do that that's at least the
opinion at this point of the City
attorney and so so the difference is I
guess what I'm saying is if you were
anywhere else in the city and and you
developed your property and the city
council put new zoning on your property
those standards would apply to your
property the reason why this is a little
bit different is because there was no
termination date on the master site plan
it lives forever so if if the city
doesn't remove property from the master
site plan it basically can't redevelop
under the central liqua plan standards
they they can stay under the standards
by which they were approved in 1987 in
perpetuity if they want to right so it's
each property owner's decision if they
stay with the master site plan or if
they choose to go with Central isqua
right and so one of the things that
Costco is asking for as part of this
process is to be allowed to be removed
from the master site
plan so I don't know if that that helps
or makes it worse but that's what we
understand yeah thank you and it does
clear it up now the question the second
part of the question why is it coming
through the design uh the development
commission and not
PPC or some other Comm because it's not
a
rezone okay we're we're asked to approve
actually let let me set this aside for
just a minute I am going to talk about
process in a minute so let let me show
you something when I get there I'm
almost there and then if you then at if
you could ask me that question again if
it still doesn't make sense okay let me
just make one point and I'll probably
ask that question again okay but you
know we're asked to um give comments or
approval to the amendment for one two
about three buildings and the roadways
and the walkway and and the connectivity
and all
that that's that's a big task you know
um granted that um uh moan or Costco you
know they've done a great job in trying
to incorporate the buildings with the
surrounding and all that but you know
we're asked to make comments for these
three major buildings 10 story you know
we you look around there's no 10 story
buildings around here so um that's a big
task to be
turn around and make comments on and
make approval and and maybe later on
Shelton can talk about the federal
funding I don't quite understand
September you know we're in August
already all of a sudden September is the
deadline we need to say yay or nay on on
this issue so that's the point I just
want to make okay yeah great thank you
thank
you so I'm sorry before I changed were
there any more questions around the
master site plan Amendment
okay so
process um one of the questions that
Connie brought up in her letter that you
received was around development
agreements um the city code um
identifies several different kinds of
development agreements Urban Villages
cluster housing
tdrs
um there isn't one that specifically
fits the circumstance and we've talked
several times with the city attorney who
beli that the um state law that enables
development agreements can be used to um
as the basis for this permit so we have
taken that question to um the City
attorney um many months ago um as we
began this um review
process um there were also some
questions about who was making the
decision and what kind of process it was
going through so you know there's the
development agreement um there's the
land plan which is also part of the
development agreement and the master
site plan Amendment which is part of the
development agreement um if it was a
freestanding land plan it might be
reviewed at a level three if it was a
freestanding Master site plan Amendment
it could be reviewed at a level five um
each of those have um different
processes and different decision makers
um and the public hearing may even be
held at a different different level um
as a Consolidated permit um there's one
hearing and the um highest level permit
is the process that it follows and the
development agreement um coming from
state law is the highest level permit
and so it follows the process um
established for that permit Connie has
asked whether um it is we've gotten a
reading from the city attorney about uh
cons consolidating these permits he had
a death in the family so we haven't been
able to contact him since we received
that question and um we'll have
something for the uh next meeting in our
briefing response
memo um so there were many letter um
questions in Connie's letter and U some
of them I uh we've tried to address
tonight and some of them uh we will
address in the memo but there was one
that we wanted to just touch on as part
of our conversation with you this
evening um and that was the question
about all the properties that surround
um Lake samamish State Park being in the
expansion areas and does that um thwart
the ability of achieving the vision of
central isqua um and the connectivity uh
around the
park you know most of the properties are
already developed or we think are likely
critical areas um for instance uh up
here to the north of Seamans and near
the Vulcan property um we think those
are critical areas they were developed
under King County so we have less
complete records of that
area
um However if those properties were
developed uh redeveloped uh we believe
that we know that Central isqua requires
certain level of connectivity and that
would apply whether those were offices
or residential would it be nice to have
residential around it yes um but
residential isn't a required use um in
these zones um it is an optional use and
there might um happen over time um but
we don't think that inherently having
the expansion areas uh include the area
around the park uh interferes with the
ability of achieving the sort of
connectivity and other kinds of
relationships that Central is qua uh
anticipated and that's my last slide so
um if you want to um I I'm assuming you
want to ask me questions before Costco
staff makes their
presentation
no I've got one okay so um the it
mentioned that the Eis was based on 1.5
million square ft of additional
development in Pickering plays and this
gives Costco the ability to build 1.5
million square feet within Pickering
Place does that then preclude any other
property owners in Pickering place from
getting approval to build anything
without redoing the
Eis um so I'm G to also look to Sheldon
because between the two of us I think
we're dangerous enough to probably say a
lot of things that aren't exactly true
what I understand is that the planned
action Eis for the central liqua plan um
included um what Costco has asked
for but beyond that and I'm going to
give you some numbers but I'll verify
those next time to make sure that you
guys don't walk away with a
misunderstanding what I understand
tonight is there's another half a
million Square F feet of retail and
about
5,000 uh residential units that are
expected in Pickering as part of the
planned action Eis um from the CIP but
um Mel I'll verify those numbers and get
that to you guys in the briefing memo so
there's not a misunderstanding but my
understanding sitting here tonight is
they're taking all the office um they're
the first ones in they're the first ones
to ask so congratulations sometimes it's
good to be first um there is additional
retail and there's additional
residential left over for others to come
in and take advantage of the planned
action e now once that's gone it doesn't
mean that others can't redevelop what it
means is they have to do sepa like
everybody else has to do sea um in other
places where the planned action e
wouldn't
apply great thank you well and and I
would add that you know for instance any
the planned action only applied to the
urban core so for in since when seventh
and Gilman and Atlas came to you they
had to do um a certain level of sea
review as well because they were outside
the urban core okay um I guess another
question the if I understand the master
site plan I understood it from years ago
had a wedding cake requirement in it did
it go up to four stories was it at a
maximum
or or five couple of fives I'm hearing I
remember years ago when I think they
wanted to build a hotel on the parcel
and and at that point wanted if I
remember right they wanted an amendment
to the master site plan to allow taller
buildings near the freeway outside the
wedding cake design and was not
recommended by the commission to do that
so without so if I understand this
correctly if we don't do the amendment
to the master site planer if the council
doesn't they wouldn't be able to go
taller than what's they would be limited
more more than what the CIP allows
exactly so I mean just to give you a
little bit more about the master site
plan it basically it also it limited
Building height it limited land uses so
residentials not allowed period and it
also had a certain number of traffic
trips so it's and in square footage so
it's basically at its peak right now so
if if we retain the Integrity of the
master site plan I think what you can
expect is the Pickering Property Owners
as a whole would not be redeveloping and
and one other thing I would add is also
um they've used all the impervious
surface so that's part of why there are
sidewalks on one sides of the streets
and things because it was very
restrictive thank
you
um there was a brief mention of retail I
just wanted to confirm is is retail an
option in the
250,000 so there's a a m 1.5 million
square feet and 250,000 of that up to
250,000 could be retail okay but it's
real we're just at such the beginning
stages that we don't know any would it
be like on the ground floor with office
above so one of the things that might be
worth bringing up here because we talked
about a lot of stuff is it let's assume
that they did want to build um a a big
block of retail another 150,000 square
feet or more of retail that's not shown
on the land plan so that would need to
come back to DC and DC would be the
decision maker on that particular
application if it were to come in the
future because right now the land plan
shows some minor additions to the retail
store and I think there's something
floating out in the parking lot maybe
the Costco retail retail store Costco
retail store so but the amount of square
footage if they wanted to do something
of substance fairly large you know and
it was more than 150,000 square feet
that's not shown on the land plan right
now in front of you guys so that would
have to come back here somewhere in the
future okay I was I had in mind um in
the new office building some other
retail tenants on ground
floors is that
what you guys are talking about you're
talking about additional retail space
right at this time that isn't part of
the land plan proposal okay all right I
was I thought about that when there was
some discussion of bringing the public
into those
spaces um when we were discussing the
plazas in the pond and everything um
being accessible to the public and not
just
to uh Costco employees and guests I
thought about that that format
right I think we would all be supportive
of that but at this time there isn't a
requirement in the central isqua
standards to do mixed use it's certainly
encouraged and we would be supportive of
that but that isn't what is actually
proposed at this time okay thanks and if
they did decide say to do 150,000 of
retail that wouldn't cut into the
500,000 of retail presume for other
parts of Pickering in the
Eis that's the way I understand that yes
great
thanks and just to be clear although
Costco has not expressed an intent for
doing that as Lucy said the way the
development agreement is written it
wouldn't preclude it so if Costco let's
say 10 years from now Costco decides you
know what it'd be great to have um some
third-party um retailers on our ground
floor of our office buildings it would
absolutely be
allowed I'm
done so I'm going to hand it over to my
honorable colleague from milany
here oh okay excuse
me that makes sense thank you Luc good
job up up down
or there we
go Mr chairman members of the commission
my name is Jackie Frank I'm the vice
president of real estate development for
Costco I've been before this body many
times going back 20 years for for the
initial warehouse for building two for
building three for uh the trading
building
um nice to be back um I wanted to uh
let's
see ah
so we've been involved in the process
for a while back in
2007 um representatives of Costco became
a member of the city's uh committee to
consider zoning reason zoning of the of
the valley floor uh Peter Khan actually
was a a member of the um economic
Vitality commission um and also a a
chamber uh member uh for uh for
government Affairs um between 2012 and
2013 we worked well with with staff um
and provided input uh to the commission
and the council for the uh development
of the uh uh development uh and design
standards um and most recently from 1 to
14 uh we've worked with staff on
applying the uh Central isqua
Development standards um to the Costco
campus through this development
agreement process but first i' before I
really get started I'd like to extend on
behalf of the company our appreciation
for staff we've we've been treated with
a tremendous amount of of respect and
professionalism um and we've uh We've
enjoyed a a marvelous collaborative
relationship for for many many
years um tonight U we have Kim Katz
who's our de development director for
Costco and Steve bulock of moany G2 who
will give the lon share of the
presentation um Russ Hazard a principal
with mulany is here David Markley of TSI
our our traffic engineer and Bob shren
from dowel our civil engineer are also
um here this evening um they don't have
a formal presentation but can be
available to answer any questions if uh
if you have them um
so when we look at the benefits that
would acue to this process that we're
undertaking um it several things pop out
to us number one by implementing the
development agreement it allows us to to
develop or redevelop the property that
we own consistent with the central isqua
plan it also manifests the city's vision
for a more urban environment um as I
mentioned we've enjoyed a a a
long-standing part parip and I think
this this continues that uh that
collaborative relationship um but it
also for us secures a long-term home for
Costco's corporate campus isqua is our
home and has been our home for many
years and we hope that it will be our
home for many years to come um but by by
approving this it it creates a context
for uh future specific development
applications so we're basically
establishing the ground the ground rules
and the and the framework within which
to um to develop um and it's helpful for
us it provides us certainty um to know
that these are the kinds of projects um
and and the and the kind of the Rules of
Engagement for uh for our our planned
growth um but we also think that it
creates a very efficient and and a
certain level of certainty uh for uh for
a process that would would help us
execute this 30-year
buildout the process itself encourages a
very thoughtful approach that integrates
an existing campus um and the U Central
isqua plan and as and as Sheldon will
tell you it it provides funding to
construct significant road
infrastructure so tonight I wanted to
take a couple minutes you know when I
was before you 20 years ago for the
warehouse you know an entirely different
story so I'd like to kind of bring you
bring you up to speed on on where we are
today as a as a company um Talk talk a
little bit about why we're here some
development background of the campus
itself um uh Steve will get give you a
little more definition on the on future
thoughts um and and Kim will talk a
little bit well Kim will talk a little
bit about the the benefits uh that we
see of of uh of this
process
so it's part of my travels uh and and
doing land use work for Costco
throughout North America um I spent a
lot of time explaining we are to people
who don't know us that well um this is
our home uh this particular Warehouse is
a highly successful building I would
imagine I would hope that that many if
not all of you have Costco cards if not
you should um but we we've enjoyed a
tremendous amount of of success over the
years and we're and we're very proud
today we we are in fact the second
largest retailer in the United States
and we are of the third largest retailer
in the world we're um in the fortune 20
less than Fortune 20 we're number 19 and
and and and moving up um at the end of
this fiscal year we will have U probably
about $10 billion in sales um throughout
the uh throughout the chain of of our
business we have uh developed over 90
more 94 million square feet of of retail
um which is on average about 144,000
Square ft we have about
190,000 uh employees world wide with
about 130,000 employees um in the United
States uh in the Pickering campus
there's about
3,000 um employees um and in the area
that's kind of adjacent in some of the
lease buildings uh we we have uh
probably a grand total of around 41
4,100 uh
employees today we've got uh 663
warehouses this is as we end our fiscal
year um in the next two weeks or so um
this is what this is a snapshot of of
what it looks like we have 468
warehouses in the United States um 88 in
Canada 33 in Mexico uh we've just opened
in Spain just in the last month or so uh
26 in the United Kingdom
um uh Taiwan uh uh Korea and Japan uh we
have quite a presence and we have six
operating warehouses in
Australia so we're doing
well a little bit of a timeline um
Costco was founded in uh in in Seattle
in
1983 um as uh uh
as and part of my history in in one
reason why we were in isqua uh we were
uh we were based in Kirkland way back
when and uh I think we we had about 60
60 warehouses at that time we were
processing entitlements in Redmond we
were going to do a a warehouse facility
and also a corporate office and uh and
that was going to be it overnight we had
secured permits and entitlements for
that um overnight we merged with the
price company basically doubling the
size of the company um which which
caused us to take a step back and say
whoa we're we're we're now going in a a
slightly different direction um the
opportunity came up at the time we were
processing the uh uh entitlements for
the warehouse here um and the
opportunity came up with with uh
Children's Orthopedic Hospital to to
take a look um and kind of realize a
vision and for the for the company to uh
to establish a corporate campus and and
really grow the business in a in a
different way um in 1994 we opened we
opened the warehouse here um and we
moved to isqua uh our new home in
1995 um in 1997 we constructed the
trading building um 1998 our our second
uh building building 2 was
built um it's interesting though in in
uh well in 2001 we built building three
and that's where things pretty much
maxed out and we talk about the master
site plan and some of the constraints
associated with that contract zoning if
you will um it it it tied our hands at
that level to at that point where we
could not continue to develop um uh
office space um
uh in on the campus which forced us to
then start look at leasing other
properties in 2002 we leased Lake Place
2 um 2008 we leased Lake Place one um
and then most recently we've completed
our our parking garage um and in 2014
Just most recently released some space
on the Microsoft
campus
um the reason why we grow our Central
headquarters is really a function of the
support for uh you know for the
warehouse operations um functions like
real estate and legal and um the buying
um accounting uh is uh you know are all
functions that grow as a as a function
of the business growing and since we
intend to continue growing the business
you can expect that we're going to
continue to grow the support functions
that uh that that allow the the the
business to uh to
run um isqua is definitely on the map we
have we have extraordinary relationships
with vendors of big- time vendors all
over the world and um I'm pleased to say
there's a lot of people who know where
isqua is they may not be able to
pronounce it but they know where it is
and um and I think there's some very
positive spin-off benefits relative to
uh Hotel use and restaurant and um you
know we have a a lot of vendors who come
and visit us uh on our turf and uh and
we're very we're very proud of of isqua
and and the hospitality that you've
shown to to uh to our vendors
community so with that I'd like to turn
it over to uh to Kim uh and then
subsequently to Steve to uh take you
through some some more specifics and of
course we'll all be available to answer
any questions
thanks hi my name is Kim cats I'm a real
estate de development director with
Costco and um my share of the slides are
going to be relatively quick cuz Lucy
did such a fantastic job of explaining
why we're here did I just have that page
down um so one one reason we're here was
to talk about the um MF
mtfa and the benefits of partnering with
the city on the um the funding of that
and improving the transportation
element the land plan of course we've
talked about um as being a very critical
component of the development agreement
and setting kind of a framework of what
our future growth might look
like and we've hit on the master site
plan um and I think we'll probably
continue on this theme tonight because
that definitely has limited our growth
potential um in in serving our campus
needs and we're hoping that you know we
can implement the SIDS and the
CIP um as part of our future campus
expansion so this isqua is our home it's
my home I live in isqua so I am very
motivated
to to keep this going keep the process
going and as Jackie mentioned as our as
we expand our warehouses we do need um
more growth for our home
office we thought this was an
interesting um aerial because it kind of
describes how the campus has grown over
the years as Jackie mentioned we opened
our warehouse in '94 and you can kind of
see how we maxed out in Pickering and
we've continued to expand outside of the
campus um we have two offices over we
call them Lake Place one and Lake Place
2 we own one of them and lease one of
them and we've recently signed a lease
for one of the Microsoft buildings which
will be moving people over to in the
next few
months so you know our intent of
expanding the campus is to accommodate
our business growth but also to
consolidate our our employees and get
the Synergy between um all of the other
components of the home office which as
Jackie mentioned accounting buyers um
the is Department we would like to keep
all of our staff kind of in one area
because it does
create a you know just more efficient
use of the
campus and I think with that I turned
over to
Steve thanks cim good evening
Commissioners it's an honor to be here
tonight
um it's it's it's exciting to to be part
of a project that feels like we're
getting to to one of the big Milestones
again for for the things that Costco is
is doing here in the community and and
um and and so I'm just I'm glad to be
here and to be part of this project and
and to hopefully try to explain this in
a way that that makes it logical and and
have sense and and be a rational
approach to
this you know we've been talking about
the Pickering Place master plan and this
is actually a rendering from that
original master plan and if you look at
it real closely you'll see a bunch of
lowrise uh structures with surface
parking out in front of them buildings
set way back from the roads lots of of
Trees and Landscaping and and it's it's
just a very Suburban type type
development something that we all
expected to see 30 years ago but as the
the the region has grown and as we are
becoming a more urban place um you know
Visions are changing and and and the
master site plan was kind of locked in
time and and it was this Suburban de uh
development approach it had very large
Street setbacks there's uh surface
parking lots there's lots of lawn and
and Landscaping in front of the
buildings and then because we're in in
isqua there was a a a big push to
protect and and honor environmental
environmentally uh sensitive areas like
streams and
shorelines and you know this is these
are some some images that show what
happened out there in in Pickering place
and it's not bad it's just what happened
and and now as as time has gone on as
we're you know getting close to 30 years
from when that master plan was approved
there's New Visions uh here here's a a
shot of a portion of Costco's campus and
you see how far back the buildings are
set back from the road and the
landscaping and the lawn the surface
parking lots in front here's a an image
of of the streams that we're preserving
and and honoring at the same time
here but but the the MSP definitely uh
has maxed out what it would allow to
happen and and that's been said several
times already tonight the the amount of
trips that were allowed when it was
first uh approved were getting close to
maxed out in 2001 and that's why why
Costco didn't build any more Office
Buildings on site after 2001 we were
allowed to or able to build the parking
garage because the garage in and of
itself doesn't generate the trips it's
just providing a parking place for for
the uh the office users to use but it
doesn't generate the trips that was the
one reason why that that one major
structure has been able to be be built
on the Costco corpor campus since 2001
but then there was other things
associated with Master site plan uh the
limit um the the height limits and just
as mentioned before it was kind of a
wedding cake effect with with five story
buildings kind of in the center of
the the the the facility the of
Pickering place and then kind of sloping
out to twostory buildings around the
perimeter I think there was a total of
two lots that that had the ability to go
up to five
stories and so then over the last few
years as we've been considering the the
new Central isqua plan and the and the
um the new development and design
standards um there's been a lot of talk
between mulany and and Costco about what
the potential will be to maybe start
building on Costco's campus again and
and we see it as a great opportunity uh
you know there there there still is some
similarities between the master site
plan and and the current code you know
there still is this this ideaa to honor
and protect the environmentally
sensitive areas and views of the area
there's a very strong push to to
recognize and continue to grow the
community spaces and the circulation uh
connections but then some of the
differences is obviously the the the
density differences low low to high and
and the Suburban model to to a more
urban model something that's not so cars
Centric but more
multimodal and and allowing for
pedestrians
bicyclists um mass transit and the
rest you know one of the elements of the
central isiga plan is the the the
circulation plan and and as mentioned
before you know the development
agreement is going to link future
development on Costco's corporate campus
with implementing some of these
plans from the central isqua plan
putting new roads in that don't even
exist improving ones that that don't
have enough
capacity so the current campus I'm going
to use my mouse here a little bit um you
know it's it's got some interesting
attributes that make it a unique place
and you know for for one thing on the
east side of the campus you all are
familiar with isqua Creek and you can
kind of see that it it creates an
undulating line there there's no there's
no roads that cross that and there's
there's only going to be
one uh on on the east side of Costco's
excuse me the west side of Costco's
campus there's there's the pond and
again it's a very irregular shape um
very organic and and the roads that that
go through Pickering place are also kind
of following those Contours and and
they're very organic and and kind of
natural and their shape and those things
have made for irregular property
boundaries and they're going to make it
difficult or it it makes it a challenge
to integrate infield development along
with this existing campus this this
campus that was designed specifically
for Costco the the buildings that they
put there they put there because they
built them just for themselves and and
they value them and they love being here
and they want to continue to build there
and and make it a custom campus for
them the areas that we see on the campus
that are potentially available for
expansion down in the South End of the
campus there there's two large surface
Lots uh just north of I90 and then
there's also the trading building which
is probably it is the smallest building
from a square footage perspective and
just not is two stories only for half of
the building the other half of the
building is just one story so there's an
opportunity there maybe to redevelop
that for additional office space and
then then there's this surface lot here
kind of on the northeast corner of
buildings one and two and those areas
provide a lot of opportunity for for
Costco to continue to grow and ADD
office space there's there's potentially
two buildings there in the Southeast
corner of the
site uh another building on the south of
building three and then the one up there
to the northeast of buildings one and
two and and we we have as
a Costco and in Milan we have poured
through the the Central isqua
Development and design standards Page by
page I won't say that I haven't
memorized I there's too much there and
but but we have studied them and tried
our best to understand them and and one
of the things that we feel very
confident about is that there is enough
area here in these footprints
under the height limits that were
allowed in in this in in the urban core
Zone to easily accommodate the 1.5
million square fet that we've asked for
and in all likelihood we won't have
anything 10 stories there we want to
leave our options open but but we don't
need to have them go up to 10 stories to
get to the 1.5
million Lucy did a great job of kind of
going through and in more detail than I
am
about how how the project at this
conceptual level and and and it is still
very conceptual we we have every intent
to come in with individual projects that
are fully detailed out and show you
exactly how we continue to meet the the
the design and development standards but
right now we're we're just at a really
conceptual stage and and we we believe
that we can put together projects that
will comply and one of the things that
we want some of the major areas of focus
that we think um are of interest to you
and to us at this point and at this
level of of review are the the areas of
the CIP and and of the design and
development standards that cover
Community spaces site design and
building
design we like to to focus you a little
bit on some of the the community spaces
that that are already in Pickering Place
both on Costco's property some of them
on commonly owned property that Costco
has constructed um and you know they're
all places that that have been done with
a great deal of care that that are
done to a high quality and a high
standard and they provide great value
for both Costco's corporate population
and anybody that else else that is
walking through the area and enjoying it
the Landscaping is is full and thick
mature and beautiful uh the Gathering
space
places offer lots of pedestrian
amenities there there are great
connection places and and and and plazas
sprinkled through Pickering
place the current campus the the
buildings that are out there have very
noticeable and and and obvious intuitive
ways to access the front doors for
pedestrians walkways and and such and
granted they they are are of a more
Suburban variety a lower
intensity um and that's going to change
and evolve as we move into to what is
required under the central isqua
plan there there's even the community
Amphitheater which is almost a work of
art and and although it was placed
on commonly held property it was
actually built by Costco for the
enjoyment of of the people that are in
Pickering place and and those that come
through the
area there's multimodal Pathways already
sprinkled throughout the the the
property so when we look at where we
would potentially do uh our new
development we see opportunities to to
develop more Community spaces similar to
those and of even a higher quality and
and definitely of a quality that is more
urban in character than what's there now
something that would relate to the
sidewalk and and and be intuitive about
how people enter the building how they
get where they need to go what's going
on and and those spaces would be
U integrated with the landscape and with
the architecture and and with the
different things that get uh included
with that you know one of the things
that we keep talking about internally as
as we're discussing this is just how
it's a great challenge to uh try to
integrate this this new campus plan and
and this new code and vision into an
existing C campus that we're going to be
keeping and that we that works well for
us but how do we how do we integrate
this this new design aesthetic into an
existing aesthetic and make them still
work together and and and make them not
clash and and have them be um compatible
with each other
as Lucy mentioned there there's a a
section that talks about site design and
and here we have an example of of an
entry
plaza where there's there's a great in
um there there's very clear cues about
what a pedestrian is supposed to do as
they as they walk up here there's raised
planting beds there's Landscaping that
that are not places where you're
supposed to go there's obvious uh
walkways where you are to go there's an
integration of both the the the
circulation pattern and Gathering space
um all sprinkled through that area and
we see that as a very desirable and
attractive space um you know here we
have an example of of raised beds and
and uh
Landscaping in association with a with a
what looks like a public road and and
those all are creating uh spaces and and
one of the things that that the the de
the design and development standards
encourage is is something that creates
strong edges and and creates and defines
where that public way is and then where
the community spaces are adjacent to
that public way and where where the
uh where the Gathering spaces are and
entrances are in relation to
that we we see this as as a as an
interesting image about how to apply
Landscaping and and transition to
Hardscape and and all those things I
think are going to be things that we
have to deal with as we're trying to
integrate these two visions of of an
existing uh campus that was developed
under a different vision and and now
we're implementing a new
vision we like this image for for a
number of different reasons you know
it's got these these architectural
elements these trellises and columns
that help frame a space and and create
an outdoor room with we've got the the
motion and the and the interest of the
water and and you know the change in
elevation the different kinds of of
landscape features from raised beds to
potted plants to to Boulders projecting
up out of the ground there's a lot of
interesting things there and and we see
these all as being potential uh ideas
and things that we could Implement in
the future as as we go about creating
those kinds of spaces as well for
building design you know the the design
and development standards are talking
about uh context and compatibility
there's there's things related to scale
and urban densities and height um
materials and
colors quality of the architecture and
detailing obviously sustainability and
then there's the overlap between
pedestrian engagement and and sharing
Community spaces and and and we we've
got some images here where we're just
wanting to say that we're not trying to
build any many of these exactly as
you're going to see them um it's more to
give you an idea of of what we think are
interesting and and ways that we might
go in the future and when we get to
putting together our project we're going
to put together a full package and and
show you what it's going to look like
and bring it in and and say okay this is
this is what we're doing now and this is
going to be fully detailed but this
point here is just kind of conceptual
brainstorming you know we're kind of
looking for you guys to dream along with
us about what might happen out there
this this image is
actually uh building three out on the
campus now and it's it's a it's a very
beautiful building and and
architecturally it's got a lot of
interesting features it's it's they've
done a a a great job of of pulling cues
from the original buildings on campus
the brick work and and some of the the
roof forms and and they implemented them
in a new and fresh way on building 3
they introduced some new materials and
some new architectural forms that that I
think are very very pleasing and
and as building three kind of built off
of building one and two I think that
when Costco and and if mulvania is part
of it Mulan when we go to build
buildings four five and six we would
like to kind of take that same approach
where we we try to pull cues from the
existing campus but then also grow it
and make it nicer and even better than
it than the the old stuff
is you know here here's an image of a
building that that is showing something
of a higher density um you know
potentially we could get up to 10
stories in in Pickering place I don't
know that we we will get there but you
know we we need to think about scale and
Architectural
quality um we like this image because of
of what it says about detailing the
architectural detailing the care that
that uh Somebody went to to to give it
some extra uh materials and and texture
and and a finer grain and and you know
lots of different things going on here
that make make the building an
interesting building there's also things
here related to
sustainability um passive shading and
and things like that that are are good
for for um energy sustainability things
and and we want to be Innovative as we
continue to build out there on the
campus here's one more image of of
building three the backside of it where
it's got a large Plaza that's that's
used quite a bit by by the employees and
and there's a lot of great things here
there's some some really interesting
detailing approaches some some different
and and unique architectural approaches
that that make it a very pleasing
building there's the community spaces
and and The Pedestrian engagement that
we find all very very
compelling so in summary
as it relates to the development design
standards and and our land plan we we
feel like the land plan is a framework
and a context for future development
applications we also believe and not
believe this is just the way the
development agreement and your code is
set up is future applications are going
to come and they're going to be reviewed
for compliance with the land plan with
the development design standards and
also with a development
agreement and Costco is committed to
creating iny Urban infill Development
that embodies the policies of the CIP
and the design
standards so to
close we just kind of want to hint hit
on the the the benefits that uh Mr Frank
brought up at the start of this
presentation implementing the
development agreement that that we're
proposing between Costco and the city
allows Costco to develop
a develop consistent with the central
isqua plan with which we believe then
manifests the city's vision for what for
a more urban
environment um it continues a
long-standing partnership between Costco
and the city and it secures a long-term
home for Costco and their corporate
campus we believe the the land plan also
provides a contest context for future
specific development applications which
we believe is important it helps us to
not have to go back and and re start
every single project we we all kind of
start with the same understanding and we
can build off of that as opposed to
going back to square one each time and
it creates an efficient and certain
process for a 30-year
buildout you know implementing this New
Vision on an existing campus is is a
great Challenge and and we believe that
the development agreement encourages a
real thoughtful approach both for us as
applicants and for City staff that
integrates the existing campus with the
CIP and finally that it provides funding
to
construct very significant and valuable
road
infrastructure so with that unless you
have any questions for me I'll sit
down architect specific question answer
architect specific
question just you you the map that shows
the the proposed buildings yes there's a
there's a dashed line build between
buildings 4 a and 4B yes that that goes
through the Western portion of 4A is
that uh have to do with a view corridor
or anything
or are you talking
about this this dash line that goes
right here correct and it actually if
you if you follow it it actually goes
around the entire perimeter of the
building and what that was meant to
indicate is roughly the perimeter of
underground parking garage great okay
okay thank
you did did you say underground parking
or under the building you meant under
the building under building underground
oh there's underground building just one
one level probably maybe
two it's it's a tough area to do that
because there's pretty high groundwater
so how many levels are you thinking
about now two levels of of parking one
underground
one uh ground level no the so so the
ground level is going to be flush with
the sidewalk there's not going to be any
exposed parking to the sidewalk there
you know there's going to be Plaza
spaces um maybe on the back side of
buildings depending what the grades are
maybe there might be some some places
where the garage might be exposed but it
would be underground
M thank
you
um so commission member Leong asked a
question earlier about timing for
Sheldon and I didn't want to lose track
of that piece because it was um I think
an important question um about timing
for the
Transportation federal component of this
on the federal fund you said Federal
funding I'm not saying Federal funding
so so I I'll do a quick overview Sheldon
and if you want to add some feel free to
come up and and do that so so
a big piece of this development
agreement revolves around paying for the
$50 million of road projects that are
going to benefit not only Costco but the
rest of Pickering and north isqua um
because you can't build half a road so
you build a whole Road and there's extra
capacity that's going to be available
beyond what Costco needs to realize
their 1.5 million square feet so the way
that the um trans mtfa the master
transport Transportation Finance ing
agreement is laid out is it's a
partnership they pay for a certain
portion we pay for a certain portion
what we're relying on or what we're
hoping for is that we
can accomplish much of the city's
obligation through State not federal
through state grants and so what Sheldon
mentioned earlier was making an
application to the transportation
Improvement board and the transportation
Improvement board is a state agency that
allocates money out to the state based
on um worthiness of projects and one
some of the criteria that they have is
they want to make sure that if we apply
for a a traffic project that it's a real
project and not just something that we
hope to get money for that we might
someday build because there's a long
line of municipalities and agencies
looking for these limited funds and so
one of the things that helps our
application immensely
is to have a development agreement done
because a development agreement is like
a contract it's with us and and a very
big company in our state not Boeing but
a very big company in our state uh
that's important that we want to keep
and help grow in our community and so
having that development agreement done
adds points if you will to the rating
system of the application that we're
going to submit for getting State Monies
to help build the road so hopefully that
makes sense and Sheldon if you want to
add some your this is your enchilada so
to speak so feel free to you know pull
that apart if you want
to no that was a really good summary
Keith uh just want to add a little bit
more to it uh one of the specific
criteria for this application is growth
and development and that's the criteria
and one of the major criteria for the
whole scoring of the application in
front of the transportation Improvement
board but to be able to demonstrate that
as Keith said the development agreement
needs to be executed and The Tib begins
their valuations of applications October
1st and so we need to have definitely in
hand the development agreement to give
to The Tib so they know that is a funded
and buildable project uh with a partner
because that's the other substantial
criteria that's under the growth and
development is that there has to be a
substantial partnership with private
development
uh or local money to be able to for them
to say yes that's a valid application
and they're willing to fund
it um thank you so hopefully that helps
yeah yeah it does it helps half of it
the other half the question that I have
is is is aad the the partner is isqua
prepared or does isqua have the money to
come up yes to match that state fund
between Costco and the money that isqua
has and the grant money
those projects all the projects within
the suite of improvements that the
partnership is about uh will be
funded okay yeah thank you so obviously
that's um you know that is that's a big
thing for us um it's a big number um and
but this is important and if if the
development agreement is approved and
you know depending on how successful
Sheldon is in getting Grant monies we
already have $5 million that we got from
the um Department of Commerce Grant to
purchase some open space as mitigation
for the road system so we've already
kind of been in line once and we're
wanting to get in line again and ask for
some additional monies you know the hope
is that whatever is left there probably
will be some left over at the end of the
day that the city has to figure out how
to fund but when you're talking about
funding a $50 million road project and
the city's share might be
you know hopefully you know knock on
wood less
than5 Million worth of that that's
that's a great investment for our
community to make in additional
infrastructure that will help our
community
grow yeah right thank you
yeah but at the same time though but at
the same time we'd like to make sure
that the interest of isqua is taken care
of um so there's there's some concern
you know and I guess off the top is that
we have numbers for 1.5 million square
fet of office space that Costco can do
whatever they that's the option that's
open to Costco uh I I guess it would be
nice to have something that says so many
percent of that or square feet would be
dedicated to Plaza or Parks or something
like that I I see area that says
pedestrian entryway which could
potentially be uh uh a courtyard I I
guess that's what you're thinking about
uh Steve so you know maybe if we can
come up with some kind of a number so
it's it it ties everybody together and
so we have some ideas of how much is
dedicated to office space how much of
that is for retail and how much is that
for open space and Plaza and
Parks thank
you
compl
mun we ask you if there's members of the
community that want to ask questions or
make
comments yeah if you'll step to the
microphone and state your name and
address and again it's late in the
evening so try to keep your comments to
five minutes
please
good evening I'm Jim sers and I'm the
owner of Pickering
square and I just have a brief comment
that I'll read here that's being given
to you for our um in compliance with our
deadline of
Friday I'm the owner of Pickering Square
retail shopping center northeast corner
of Pickering Place directly west of
Costco store our 13 retail tenants
comprise over half the retail stores of
Pickering place including Costco
warehouse store I also represent the
other owners of Pickering place as a
board permanent board member of
Pickering Place Owners Association
pboa organized to implement the
ccnr and the isqua master plan now as an
overview first let me state that as
owner I support the central isqua vision
Incorporated in the CIP and the
cids I believe other owners sh share my
desire to move from the 1987 Suburban
Pickering Place master plan to allow
future development under this Vision in
fact I have been negotiating with Costco
attorneys on proposed amendments to our
ccnr that will remove the master permit
from the ccnr and allow isqua to adopt
zoning and development
standards processes to guide the
Redevelopment which is consistent with a
true urban center
our proposed draft included full range
of CIP issues including residential
which is currently prohibited Pickering
place we understand from a meeting with
your mayor and City officials yesterday
that some urgency has come up with the
two
applications to Costco to remove the
Costco properties from the master plan
for a development agreement to allow
higher
density of the CIP in consideration for
for substantial funding toward the
planned action
Transportation model to support this
density however CCR amendments are still
needed in addition to removing Costco
Parcels from the city's master plan
since these are private Covenant
recorded for Mutual
protection and benefit of all Parcels at
Pickering place for example the height
of proposed Costco towers and additional
garage floors in the land plan are in VI
viation of the ccnr regardless of the
council's adaptation of major amendments
removing car Costco Parcels from the
master
plan which consists of the same height
restrictions We Believe assurances from
senior Costco official stated yesterday
that they are ready to immediately
complete these negotiations for ccnr
amendments it is our hope that these can
be approved in a time frame which will
keep the transportation funding schedule
intact and if it won't be and it won't
be for lack on our part on a related
note the staff report states that there
are no Criterion for major Amendment to
the master plan apparently the city
believes it can remove a property upon
the request of one
owner when the master plan was a
contract with the owner of all the
property now many successor and their
successors of that owner we acknowledge
that the DA has a vague condition to
protect interest of those left behind
and we'll wa and we'll be watching for
more detailed substance and process that
needs to be added to this part of the DA
for example the Popa Pickering Place
Owners Association common roads and
common areas are going to be impacted
however if we are successful in amending
the ccnr to include a process for owner
association approval for removing all
Pickering place from the master plan
this part of the development agreement
will be moot if not we reserve our right
to challenge the amendment process of
the master plan requested in the Costco
application the staff the staff report
was complete and clear but we have a few
questions and I would like the staff to
either address it tonight or we'll take
written comment to not take up too much
time tonight one the background section
talks about the new
1.5
million of feet included in the Costco
retail store it goes on to State the
staff will attempt to make a compliant
with the
cidds as soon as possible regarding the
remodel and full compliance that's been
already discussed and you can read more
of our comments on that one of the one
of you brought it up and the question on
number eight was about the Eis that was
also brought
up on the maps I do not uh we do not see
the recently annexed area to Popa
Pickering Place Owners Association by
Costco what is the location in the area
does the city plan to assume ownership
of this parcel in the future including
responsibility for maintenance of the
Wetland critical area how much is
current and proposed expansion of Costco
retail store how many parking spaces
will be displaced by Costco retail store
car wash all parking must be contained
on site for Costco retail store and
Office Buildings why is the discussion
and location of future Costco expansion
area not owned by Costco included in the
da many of the exhibits to the staff
report are inaccurate as to drainage and
Wetland and critical areas as part of
the master plan Amendment the remaining
three wetland critical area shown in the
master plan permit should be subject to
replacement without regard to being in
the city of
isqua in conclusion Pickering Place does
not support the current Costco
application until these issues are
addressed we've been working on this for
years and Costco has not been the Good
Neighbor they've violated our parking
and parking is critical to any retail
tenant five minutes are up then I'm done
thank you anybody
else thank you David kapler 255
Southeast Andre Street the pace that
we're charging in on this is a great
concern and how the public involvement
and the commission involvement and the
rest is of serious concern how that can
be managed and um I hope the uh public
involvement and the commission
involvement is not short shortened out
in that process uh some little some
picky things and some sidewalk on 11th
just west of the Costco store there's no
sidewalk on the east side of 11th drives
me nuts but um I mean there's there's no
sidewalking west of um which is not in
their part of their plan in no no side
off West of um Red Robin I mean there's
things to figure out on the uh some of
those kinds of things a little picky but
it would sure this is the time we maybe
we can address them get them done um
sounds like bikes are allowed on the
trail around the pond do you really want
to have bikes on that trail with
thousands of people working right there
and on a narrow Trail it's often icy or
wet or slimy but um um
internal inter we got curved streets and
we went all these crosswalks and stuff
so the street design and how we get
these these crosswalks between the
different buildings really needs to be
done well so because we're going to have
a lot of traffic through there where the
parking garage the New Roads and the
rest really need to be concentrating on
people being aware of all those
pedestrians out
there um open space lately my confidence
in the cities dealing with Open Spaces
real low and um very frustrating um I'm
concerned about the the open space Along
The Tib along the creek isqua creek and
some of the other open space areas and
how how that will be dealt with the
trail over there on is is most probably
when you start mixing the bikes and the
pedestrians it's too narrow along the
creek really should be widened and maybe
consider separating the bikes and the
the pedestrians when you're going to add
this many additional people you know
you've been over there you've seen all
the people walking around with badges
from Costco go the employees get out and
use a trail system with that many more
people on that trail is that trail
really
adequate um at the same time I'm always
fighting for trees but at the same time
along that trail we got some big
cottonwoods that are really not tra
trees that should be overhanging a
highly used uh pedestrian and bicycle
trail and management of those resources
needs needs needs to be more proactive
over time to to make that safer but also
be an appropriate uh habitat along the
creek 12th Avenue over Crossing they're
talking about a full as I'm it's shown
on the map here tonight I'm real
skeptical about the cost and whether we
want that to me we need to be looking at
flyer
stations bus flyer type drop offs along
I90 and pedestrian bicycle crossover of
I90 and that hopefully will will not be
precluded by what's going to be
happening at the site over
time the de development agreement
development agreements may be allowed by
the state to cover this whether the city
code actually allows the type of
development being proposed here is
another question and that's the the
limiting factor on the development
agreement we need to make sure we're in
compliance with city code not just state
law but both thank you thank you
D anybody else Connie
hi I'm Connie Marsh you know where I
live already or at least where I work so
I was just reading the code again about
development agreements and all of the
other development Agreements are
actually uh required to be um sent by
development commission to the council
recommended so where it said optional up
here that's not what I found in the code
they said it's a requirement so when
they focus you staff Focus you focuses
you on the land plan from everything I
can see you're actually sending the
whole development agreement and the land
plan is a part of that and I guess I'm
disturbed by what seems to me to be a
refocus away from one of your main tasks
which is looking at the development
agreement and making comments on that so
I think you can they can't stop you but
that's not where they're hurting
you
um he covered the Pickering so I'm not
going to let that
go uh planed to action ordinance if you
read the actual language within the
planed action ordinance it says that in
order to qualify for the plan to action
ordinance you have to fulfill the
requirements of the CIP because they're
doing a development agreement clearly
they don't so I don't see how you can
use the plan action ordinance for your
environmental review for this and
perhaps another legal opinion would be
good uh the description of the interface
with the state park wasn't convincing at
all this thing in the land plan also has
to interface with the state park along
with the other areas to give us the
connectivity that we need for the
central Isa plan so I think that needs
to be strengthened okay so I'm assuming
you guys read my lengthy and
ridiculously detailed email and I
apologize for that but it made me crazy
so I had to do it so now I want to talk
about some things that I think are way
more fun uh and Costco you're probably
going to dislike this as much as you
dislike the land and Shore committee
meeting but I look at the images that
are pro you know presented and I say
this is for old people and I am one of
those old people I see lots of stage
sort of static yeah we have a rock and I
guess that's not what I want anymore I
want places that are active and
entertaining and potentially even bright
so when you're looking at a
plaza I don't see Rockery uh I went
around isqua last year and I said what
do you guys want in your parks and I
talked to adults and I went to many
people and you know what they said they
said you know we want adult
swings we want bouncy toys
we want places where we can balance and
goof around and just you know some
places of Peace but a lot of places
where we can just sort of destress and
we want them close and we want to have
fun and I'm going well yeah I want to
walk I want to go to the mountains but
if you're going out to a plaza what do
you really want to be doing and so me
I'm thinking I want an immense Scrabble
board where you can change out the tiles
and make words and it's Costco it's a
private canvas I don't even care if you
spell check it and they could even be
obscene I would encourage that maybe not
everyone uh I want words like joy
laughter relaxation and conversation to
be your words not you know sustainable
yeah that's good but that's a given you
have to do it how do you create a
vibrant excellent area where when people
go to their Plaza they feel these things
so I think the vocabulary needs to
change in how you're looking at it all
and that will help provide some of the
interface that you get with the city
because if you make it that awesome for
your people then you're going to get us
coming over to play on your adult swings
and play your big Scrabble game and then
we will get a little bit more of the
energy that we are seeking in the
central isqua plan and I got to say just
pretty much all of that is missing so
one of my favorite things is I want a
sound pole where you go up and you hit
it and and it plays random music and
then you dance madcap okay so why not
have fun when you're doing this instead
of just being at flip and work all the
time so beyond that and boring again uh
when I was looking at all of the paths
very few paths actually went to the
trails they just sort of cut off and
went to nowhere and ended and I didn't
see your requirements for the paths
actually being able to be linked and
looped and connected so you could always
get to a trailer a place on all of the
paths um and I think that's important
when especially when you're looking at
basically making big huge blockades for
for you know building barriers so people
can't walk easily okay so five minutes
Connie y i I don't like this yet I'm
trying to force you to do something
better so
please thank
you anybody else
okay again next two weeks we'll have
another meeting and you can review the
changes to the land use I'll ask members
of the commission if they have any
questions or comments that they want to
ask I guess I'm I'm wondering the
process will go through on this since
this is still a relatively new
experience I think as we're dealing with
the development agreement and the land
plan so do we want to just provide com
questions we've had opportunities for
questions but we do we want to do the
typical provide observations comments um
that would be next next time I would
think this time would be asking
questions next meeting we got another
meeting for more
questions I I would prefer to have as
much as you can tell us because what
we're going to do is take what we've
heard from the public what we've heard
from you we're going to take that back
we're going to try and respond to that
and what we would prefer if we need to
be redrafting language changing
conditions providing additional
information we want to do that in a
thoughtful way ahead of time so you have
a chance to consider it so we'd prefer
to get it tonight
okay so if you got comments or opinions
on anything we talked about
tonight go ahead I'll jump in so well
you may start the um I guess one uh one
comment I would have that I would want
to see somewhere in there is specifying
that it does leave open the 5,000 units
and 500,000 square feet of retail within
Pickering place still is capability
because one of the huge benefits I see
here is 1.5 million square feet is
probably 6,000 employees and it'd be a
great place to build some housing right
next to that within Pickering place and
some more retail so I'd want that
confirmed in there um
and the
uh the one the note about the corner of
building
4A I think it was bring that out I I
actually I understand the agreement I
was on the task force for the
development standard so I understand the
bringing it out and creating the urban
environment but that one corner I
thought could would be a perfect place
to create some better public open space
it's going to be a real focal point for
people driving through there and to
bring the building all the way out I
thought eliminated the possibility of
doing something fun at that corner
perhaps and and I even wondered about
could that building I wonder about the
possibility of maintaining any views to
the South Southeast down Lake Drive that
building 4A extends out enough to block
any possibility of that and there was
nothing in there really about view
corridors and potential Vistas to the
South and it was in the staff report but
you're right I didn't include it in the
presentation saw I saw some brief
mentions but not about that specifically
was it blocking anything and I thought
is there any possibility to bring that
building back and maintain more of a a
view corridor okay thank
you
so make sure I'm turned on here so um
just a maybe a few comments um I think I
asked my questions one of them is is
kind of the procedural comment where
under the development agreement when
we're talking about how the development
commission would be involved in in
buildings over 150,000 square feet it
was essentially Community Conference
provide some input it's kind of a take
it or leave it sort of a scenario where
other projects in the central is plet
over 150,000 square feet would be
subject to a review and we look at
architectural features and and uh
implementation of those standards to as
another level of a detailed review and
I'm I'm
wondering um why
that why that uh process wouldn't be
applicable here I understand there's
some additional risk but you're still
designing to a standard and we're not
dealing with you know changing the site
configuration or anything like that
we're talking about building
architectural features in compliance
with those design standards the reason I
say that
is um we are new in the central isqua
plan and those design standards and now
we're making an agreement that's going
to last for 30 years it's going to vest
to a very new standard and I think that
comment was made in in public comments
or that were provided um by Miss Marsh
and I think that was um a good point and
so I I guess I'm trying to find how do
we make sure we're holding the future
development of the Costco campus to the
rigor of the design standards and making
sure we get high quality design clearly
the work that's been done on campus and
the examples you show are high standard
and and that's the commitment of the
company but it it is I'm just want to
protect that um rigor I think into the
future U particularly since there's so
much newness to the standard there's um
um could I add just one point clarify
one point that you made and the rest of
it will address in the memo um the level
of information that would come to the
development commission for buildings
over 150,000 Square
ft whether you're giving input or
whether you're making a decision the
level of information would be the
same as conceptual as what we're seeing
today no at at more like the seventh and
Gilman project right so it would be the
um same level of information you would
you would see the building designs the
plaza designs the landscape plans the
question um The Proposal in front of you
is um since you've seen kind of the
general framework of the land plan um
and made a recommendation on that for
those buildings only you would be giving
input as opposed to making a decision
that's the proposal but not a reduction
in the level of information you would
receive at that meeting okay I I
understood that okay and I I just we're
at a conceptual level here we're
approving something at a conceptual
level and our future influence is
different than it would be for other
similar projects I guess was my point um
so I I maybe some additional thought
around that okay you you heard me
earlier make comments about The
Pedestrian Bridges and I I continue to
have concern particularly those that
cross the public uh Street um and
commissioner Morgan's Point about a
viewcar well you create a viewcar then
you just run pedestrian bridges in front
of it and you've lost your view corridor
so I I I just wonder what the um
space will feel like um when you're
traveling down Lake Lane when you've got
pedestrian two at least two pedestrian
Bridges Crossing in front of you um and
the examples that were provided in the
um uh commission materials this evening
the agenda materials showed glass boxes
crossing the street and that's not a
very interesting architectural feature
in my opinion so again I I uh
particularly those across the street I'm
concerned about that and also the
pulling The Pedestrian activity up off
of the
street
um I am um concerned about and with the
comment that commissioner Morgan just
made about the total consumption of the
essentially the office development in
the Pickering place um planned action
Eis essentially creating now a barrier
to any future office development that
might happen because they will need to
go through the more uh detailed sepa and
potentially environmental review process
um so it becomes a barrier to Future
development so this this development
agreement essentially ties that up for
30 years so um something to think about
is there some way to mitigate that or
update the planned action Eis at some
point down the road or help to fund that
update that addresses the opportunity to
create additional office development
although at the same time we want to
encourage residential and other um sorts
of development more so than the office
that's being consumed by the Costco
proposal and then the other uh and this
is a more detailed observation and we
have the trail that runs essentially on
the backside of the property that's what
it feels like along uh isqua Creek and
we had quite a conversation about this
when the parking garage proposal came
through about essentially the property
turning its back to the trail and so uh
the trail is a great opportunity I think
to invite people off the trail into the
the property uh into the plaza to the
public spaces onto the street even as a
connection an alternative connection to
get to the state park um through um you
know uh something that essentially says
come take a look because right now the
way this is proposed is the property is
turning its back to the trail and Trail
users are not going to feel welcome to
leave the trail so I think that's
something to think about and how this
and that's maybe a detail that's got to
be dealt with later but again that's an
an amenity that we should be taking
advantage of and not turning our backs
to uh the public Trail on the on the
back side of the property so along as a
qua Creek those are my comments and
observations
R thank you um I I guess I just kind of
like to dovetail into what uh
commissioner Brennan had had mentioned
you know the residential part we didn't
talk a lot about the residential
although we did say that at this time
it's not been looked at or traffic study
hasn't been doing that and couple things
on that is that one um there's nothing
right now the way it's presented there's
nothing that draws The Pedestrian into
that area it's all office space you know
um weekends maybe evenings it's it's
there's not a lot of activities going on
so we kind of need something to draw the
uh pedestrian uh residential folks into
that area and maybe the
residential concept would come in where
you have residential folks living there
and so consequently you have the people
here and so that ties in with the plaza
concept you have the plaza people come
out they spend their time out there you
have trails and complete the trail so
you can have folks using that so I don't
think residential is a bad idea uh if
that's what you're thinking and maybe
it's in the future but you know that's
that's that's good you have residential
you have and by the time residential is
completed you have space set up for open
space Plaza walkway Trails uh with of
sidewalk is there um I I find it very
disturbing when you're squeezing the
sidewalk or or walkway into four feet I
mean you know four feet is basically two
person walking and they're always
hitting each other now if you're
inviting folks to come out from the
trail and then biking and walking you
you need a wider uh width of walkway so
I I kind of like to see something like
that that you have the space and you
have this walkway in there the plaza and
the open space uh I'd like what you have
right now uh taking advantage of of the
water on on the uh West Side there um
but if you could invite you know have
some good invitation for folks to come
out spend some time there uh maybe set
the building back um so that's what I'm
seeing and I go back to the fact that I
mentioned earlier is that if you if we
could have some
numbers percentage of of square feet uh
of open space dedicated to Plaza or open
space dedicated for garden and stuff
like that I think that would be
helpful thank you
Richard I I guess I'm still a little
confused
on the connection between the master
site plan and and the central isqua plan
and how how the you know I understand
how the value to the Costco property
that that would be to adopt that it
seems like Pickering place is kind of
put on there's a nness on them that they
and I don't understand how you reconcile
that I guess I
so I that would I'd like to that needs
to be cleared up in my mind maybe it is
to everybody else and I'm just the
slower person on the board uh could you
explain what you said you said the
onuses on the Pickering
place on the on the on the other
property on the other property okay
right and uh I don't know how you
reconcile that I I think I understand
the difference but I don't understand
how they reconcile you know it seems
like they're being penalized if they're
not included in the
at in in what's going to be granted to
Costco now the other thing that concerns
me is the the tip tip process in the
state state the state highway funding
having a little bit of familiarity with
that the you know it's great it's great
that there's an opportunity for that the
city to be able to minimize their
investment but the there's the downside
of that of what if they don't get the
project and I I know that's always a a
bit of a gamble but it's a pretty if if
if the number you said was $50 million
and the city's obligation would be 5
million where do the other 45 million
come up if it doesn't happen you know if
they don't get the tip tip funding that
doesn't make sense to
me and just if I can Mr chair just to
clarify the piece so I you know just to
be clear right now the way the mtfa
reads is there's a partnership so the
city's percentage is 52% of that $50
million project so there's so in no case
are we paying $50 million for that get
so Costco right now is paying $23.7
million guaranteed and then the city's
portion of that could be as high as
somewhere around $26 million um we're
going to we're working to try and reduce
that the goal would be zero um you know
but where where that falls along the
Spectrum we have to be ready to pay the
the the upper end of that assuming we
get no Grant gr money so that's what
we're walking into this understanding
but still
even with that even if we got no grant
money we're basically building a project
at 50 cents on the dollar and in any
public process that's not a bad deal so
so that's the starting point and that's
assuming zero grant money from the city
okay Katie
I
think
okay
uh I guess I I want to know from the
from staff how are you going to address
Connie asked some very intelligent
questions smarter than I could and kind
of would like to know where are we in
rep in response to her questions are you
going to prepare response
memo yes um the questions that are in
Connie's letter and in Mr siver's letter
will be addressed um in our memo okay so
and and just to add one thing so Mr sers
Connie and we actually got another
letter um the city received a letter
from uh the Fred Meyer Home Depot
shopping center so we'll include that as
well um and that represents all the
public comments we've gotten on this to
date okay
and I think they were not in town to
come to this meeting but I would be
surprised if they didn't come to your
next meeting okay so and we will provide
um the commission with copies of both of
those letters um as part of the
packet
um I I have similar concerns of this
transport for one thing this it bothers
me whenever we talk about getting this
much money and we got to hurry because
we got a
deadline to me it's something like we
dealt with in a planning policy in
regards to going to be a urban center or
something planning policy said we don't
want to do this because we're only doing
it so that we can get
money and that was our recommendation to
council and they said no we're going to
go ahead that's why the council makes
decisions and we just make
recommendations but anytime we start
saying we we got a deadline and we got
to get this thing done is when mistakes
happen and one of the questions that
Connie asks is what
about the fact that some of these
standards were done on a we got to get
them done and we can always change them
but now we're going to base something
for 30
years and we don't know if there's are
going to be around in two years they
might change everything in two years
because they aren't working and how is
that going to affect this proposed
development agreement that that just
bothers me I'd like to know
the city got a check somewhere in escrow
for for $26
million um so just to clarify I guess
what what I would task the commission is
to think about what their purview is and
and in terms of the mtfa is really a
funding agreement between the city and a
private developer and you know if you
guys feel like that you don't want to
comment on that because you don't think
that's in your purview then I would
suggest that you guys be clear that you
guys are what whatever is coming out of
this commission you say hey we took a
pass on that you know because that's the
council's baileywick and we're going to
let them decide whether they want to
write that check for $25 million so I'm
just saying you guys can pick whatever
you want to say about that um we will
transmit that to the council but you
don't need to take on anything that you
feel is beyond your
scope okay except except
that we're being asked to recommend a
development agreement that's sort of
contingent on having $25
million and so if we don't have $25
million then I'm not sure why we're
doing the development
agreement
if did I make myself is that absolutely
my convoluted or did you understand what
I'm
saying okay yeah so we might be beating
a dead horse if I may sh if I
may the city's share of this this $50
million number is for a suite of
improvements as I mentioned earlier that
is part of the central isqua plan they
are roads that were planned to support
the densities of which the city
adopted to date before the application
that we make to The
Tib currently the city has already
received $12 million in Grants against
its
share we're looking for just under 10
with The Tib we've had meetings with The
Tib executive director and their
engineering staff that do project uh
Grant application reviews they're very
positive about this
application I can't guarantee it but
we've been talking with them for three
years and they've just about been
begging us to bring the application in
so if that application gets in and is
awarded the city is looking probably on
the order of $3 million out of its
pocket for $50 million of improvements
so that's kind of the status of where we
are I just wanted to address your
question a little bit more thoroughly
would have could or should have yeah
would have could or should have
the other question I have is kind of a
technical question for the
architect
um I was a little concerned when you
were saying two levels of
parking underground or below ground or
at ground level cuz I don't think that
that parking garage I thought I only had
one level underground or it was when
they built it and one of the concerns of
course is the groundwater right
so are you talking about putting one
level and maybe raising up
no
so buildings one two and three all
have what do you call
them they're they're under building
parking garages that on the front of the
buildings as the buildings face the road
they're completely below grade but on
back sides of building they're exposed
because the Topography is dropping and
and that may may be the case when we
start looking at at some of these
buildings they may have similar
opportunity um we know the the the
parking garage that's the way the
parking garage the
first the first level is half
Subterranean it's it's not fully
submerged right
um right now what we're saying is we
think we need to have at least one level
of of parking underneath these buildings
and and maybe two depending on how it
goes we understand that if we go more
it's going to cost a lot more we don't
want to go
to okay I just but but it would it would
cost a lot more to do it what you were
saying That's any other commissions have
any other
questions Ray just a follow up on that
question uh so whatever the parking
requirement if you run
into the water table if you start going
underground why could you not go into
the the parking garage that you have at
a few more um levels I'm not I can't
remember whether we uh there's some
option that you may be able to add a
couple more floors on that they
said they can do oh okay we've already
designed and built the garage to
accommodate two more levels oh okay so
all the steel all the concrete is
already in the building to handle two
more floors okay okay thank
you
that's it thank you everybody for
attending we'll adjourn at uh 5 to 10 oh
um Chris there was one more
more we got some housekeeping business
for commission members so the St stuff
that you guys might might be interested
in or you're welcome to stay and see how
we conduct our elections the Chairman's
not here so he'll probably get
elected well I'm Christopher Wright with
the development services department and
um as you see on the agenda we have the
election of officers on the agenda and
you certainly can you absolutely can do
the election of officers tonight if
you're ready and willing and able it is
admittedly a little awkward with the
chair not being here um so like I said
you can do the elections if you want we
know that we have another meeting in two
weeks and unfortunately Randy won't be
here for that one
either then for sure he gets elected but
we could in the meantime try and get a
hold of him I don't know how accessible
he is but at least to ask him if he'd be
willing to serve if elected so I'll kind
of leave it up to you on whether you
want to do it tonight or try to talk to
Randy spend these two weeks campaigning
and uh and uh
lobbying
keep the same slate for
another I'm sorry we're going to keep
the same slate for another year maybe or
I'll try to get a hold of
Randy and see if he agrees and then we
can talk about it you guys think about
it or when you want to put your you know
right in candidate for
Ray I I think what you have so I'll try
to get a hold of
yeah
exis sorry why don't we why don't we
make a I'll make a proposal tonight or
make a nomination that we we select we
extend the the roles of each person for
another year we'll try to get hold of
Randy and and confirm that next I that's
fine we can do that we can vote next
week I but I'd like to give him at least
the option to say no I'm too busy now
signing books or something I'm going to
have to resign or something so is that
agreeable with everyone yeah I'm fine
and we need to make sure everybody's
term is still good yeah we're we're fine
yeah your um position it it's May so
okay we've got some time I'm good um on
that line um on a personal note is my
term extended I haven't gotten anything
writing yet I would have to look I mean
this past spring we went through that uh
bringing on the new members I never
heard yeah we look at Every Spring is
when we evaluate whether people need to
be renewed or not and we let you know if
you do anything oh anything well she has
a letter no I didn't know if I was up or
not no if you didn't hear anything show
up i' I'd ask the staff to check and
make sure everybody's still I think the
P same right but I hear that if we
extend everybody gets a
rise we'll we'll double your we'll
double your salary actually if you look
in your packets yeah
I don't have
thec um if you look in your packets on
the second page it has everyone's terms
this is a print out from the website my
packet didn't have that page well that's
just weird that's because it's they like
me better no they didn't yeah they
didn't on both sides she has it I got it
for some reason yeah you didn't do your
homework
um so I don't put the packets together
but I will make sure it's in the next
packet see that so um just I'll read
this out um Michael is
2015 Randy is 2015 Mel is 2016 Carl is
2016 Ray is 2018 Richard is 2018 and
Katie is
2018 okay so Carl we'll try and get a
hold of Randy in the next week or two
and we'll plan on doing the actual
voting at their next meeting next
meeting after the next meeting okay
great thank you thank you thank you
thank you anything else for the good of
the order if not we're Jour I want to
say Lucy did a great job in her
presentation very good thank you
yeah no it's
great