uh good evening uh the development
Commission meeting for Wednesday
September 3rd come to order first item
of business is the approval of the
minutes from the last meeting of August
20th are there any additions or
Corrections Mr chair I move we approve
the meeting minutes of the August 20th
2014 meeting moved and seconded all in
favor I
opposed minutes are
approved good evening uh
nice to see a nice
turnout tonight what we're going to do
again is talk more about a update on the
U development Commission on the Costco
Master site plan
Amendment uh we're going to have a
schedule update
expectations um a staff report and then
briefing response memo and we'll open up
for public comment again as we did two
weeks ago I'd ask people that want to
comment to please sign up and when you
do make your comments limit you be I'll
try to keep it to five minutes I will
keep somewhat of a control on it and
tell you when your five minutes is up
ask you to honor that so everybody has a
chance to speak and we're not here till
tomorrow
breakfast so with
that I'm not sure which one of you guys
has taken it but I think Keith is a
short
STW so um good evening development
commission Keith nen uh economic
development director so I'm going to
start with an apology um I think I sent
you guys an email about one email every
hour every
hour um we received a lot of
Correspondence associated with these
proposed actions and staff wanted to
make sure that you guys received all of
those and um
I think at this point at least I believe
you have so uh starting there so sorry
for all the emails but I think you guys
are um caught up uh schedule um as the
chair mentioned um there is some
schedule adjustments and part of it is
you know when you get into a process you
need to kind of take note of your
surroundings and I think as Lucy and I
talked about the last DC meeting you
guys asked a lot of really good question
questions and I think there was no way
that we felt like or very little
probability that you guys could be done
talking about this in one more meeting
so what we talked about is you know
could we push the schedule could we give
you guys another bite at this apple and
the answer is yes and so right now you
don't need to take another meeting if
you guys finish tonight great um we can
have uh two Wednesdays from now off but
if you need uh to meet on the 17th then
um we have set aside the amount of time
to do
that the second thing I want to talk
about is what Lucy and I affectionally
call the parking lot and I put the
parking lot up on the wall and what the
parking lot is is as we sit and talk
about the items tonight um some of them
can be fairly complicated and we can
find ourselves spending the entire night
talking about one particular item so if
it looks like we're in the middle of a
conversation that might want to be
lengthy or might want to be be
extracted my suggestion is we put it on
the parking lot so we don't lose it um
and then we come back to it later either
later tonight or maybe at the next
meeting assuming we have another meeting
so I'm going to man the parking lot and
as we talk about things if it looks like
there's things that need to go into the
parking lot I'll go ahead and put them
there and then expectations um again
just to remind the commission um what
we've queed up is we've queed up um uh
an amendment to the master site plan for
Pickering um a draft development
agreement for Costco and specifically
the land plan which is exhibit D and the
staff report that's part of that
development agreement so that is um
that's the extent of my introductory
remarks and I'm going to turn it over to
Lucy at this
point that was was Keith niman economic
development director and parking lot
attendant yes I am and I'm Lucy slowman
land development manager for development
services okay so um here we are at
meeting number two uh looking at the
land plan the master site plan Amendment
and the development agreement for
Costco um last meeting we spent a lot of
time talking about the land plan and um
uh the commission and the public brought
up questions uh We've addressed those uh
at least initially in the briefing
response memo um tonight I want to focus
more on um the master site plan and the
um briefing response memo so um first
the U Master site plan
Amendment so just to take a step back
back for a moment
um
literally excuse me um so the master
site plan Amendment this is uh the
graphic that Costco showed last time and
as you likely remember the master site
plan was approved in
1987 and it set very strict Heights uh
limits on Heights impervious surface
land uses and vehicular trips those are
generally all maxed out um there were
very high parking requirements and
significant setbacks required and um as
a result for instance as Costco
mentioned last time their last building
in Pickering place was
[Music]
2001 um in 2012 and 2013 the isqua city
council adopted the central isqua plan
and Central isqua Development and design
standards and rezoned the
properties um and so I think one of the
things um the ways to think about this
is just with any other rezone we are
looking at property that had one zone
and one kind of land use permit and now
it has a different Zone and potentially
a different land use permit and that
land use permit is one of the elements
that's before you um so uh I think one
of the things that's um somewhat
confusing is that um
there's the master site plan that the
city approved as a land use permit which
contained a billion conditions of which
you saw all of them in the staff report
we provided you and part of the purpose
was that that there was a lot of
confusion around that what was in the
master site Planet uh what would we lose
by um approving this amendment um were
there things that we needed to keep
track of so although the original staff
report on the the land plan you received
was actually a joint staff report for
the master site plan Amendment and the
land plan we have pulled the master site
plan Amendment out and created a
separate staff report because it just
seemed like it needed that level of
detail and attention and so the purpose
of the staff report was primarily to
look at the status of each of the
original approval conditions and that
was in the staff report you've received
and
from the staff's perspective all but
three of those conditions were done or
complete or no longer relevant and
before I go on to talk about those three
um conditions my question to the
commission is do you have questions or
concerns about the status of those
conditions as we presented them to you
yeah I do okay uh under the status of of
approval conditions under drainage down
at uh Roman numeral
20 says uh the city may take over the
monitoring program and then the status
is not chose not to take
over What's happen not chose not to take
over I don't know what uh so it says
that the city may take over the
monitoring program and I think the
response is intended to say that the
city decided not to take over the
monitoring program and it's remained
with the Pickering Place Owners
Association not chose not meant that
they decided to
so thanks okay the the city decided not
to um I historically I don't know um how
that decision
wased um I assumed that that was the
city's choice but um I don't actually
know the history of that
decision any other
questions okay so um in reviewing that
um staff identified three conditions
that we felt should be carried forward
into the land plan um and therefore made
a part of the actions going
forward um one of these was and and the
numbers here 678 those are the new the
numbers as they would be consecutively
added to the previous five conditions
that staff proposed so condition number
six would be to maintain a 200t setback
from isqua Creek as permanent open space
and staff recognizes that that 200 feet
would be equivalent to tract a and tract
a is what is shown uh in Blue on um this
slide and in tract a condition number
seven would limit the use of fertilizers
pesticides and herbicides within 200
feet of the
creek and Lucy yeah before we go any
further what does that
mean limit use of fertilizers pesticide
and herbicid what does limit mean once a
month twice a week every 6
months what amounts of fertilizers what
amount of pesticides what amount of
herbicides what does that mean okay
sounds like we'll be revising that
condition and getting it back to
you
um I take your
point okay and then number eight is um
the private property cc&rs as they may
be amended from time to time will remain
on the property and will govern the use
ownership and maintenance of commonly
owned areas and Facilities so um the
point of this is that that those um
common properties are owned by the
Pickering Place Owners Association and
and the ccnr are the rules by which they
govern themselves and how those are to
be hand handled and that would remain in
place to address those maintenance and
ownership
issues procedures
Etc maybe I'm
so but CC andrs are private rules or
regulations against the property and
you're referencing something that's not
under the city's control as part of a
condition of a city decision I I just
don't know if that's consistent practice
out there I don't know that I've ever
seen that done so I I guess I don't know
that it makes that much difference if
the language as you've drafted it says
if they're amended in the future or even
if they're eliminated by the property
owners through the process described in
the ccnr to amend those and I guess it
it doesn't really matter because their
standing is different than a permit
condition you w generally put CC andrs
in there a permit so I was just confused
about kind of the blending of the two
right different ways to essentially
regulate property one private one
through the Kei dying to tell you
something so so um so um neither Lucy
nor I were here in 1987 so as we kind of
got into this even born then um yeah we
exactly um so as we got into this I
think we were surprised by a lot of what
happened in 1987 related to this permit
the city is signature to the
cc&rs um and so we we actually I mean it
doesn't mean that what you mention Mike
won't happen I mean there is a scenario
potentially where um all of the property
owners in Pickering could decide to
disband and remove the ccnr you know the
difficulty is you have commonly owned
facilities and so you know the question
is is you potentially decide to
you know break that apart and dissolve
it what happens to those commonly owned
facilities so for example the pond um
that's in the middle of Pickering is one
of those commonly owned facilities and
the obligations for maintaining that are
part of the ccnr so it's a good point um
this one is a little bit of a funky duck
to some extent and I think we're trying
to understand it and and deal with some
of those issues as well well and I guess
the question that the point that I would
raise with you um to see if you have a
thought on it um I think what we were
identifying because we were signatories
although at the time Pickering Barn was
part of it and therefore the city land
was in it and since that time Pickering
barn and its land has been removed from
Pickering place but we're still on the
cc&rs in some way um so I guess um the
other option is that this is sort of
noted as a finding
but not as a condition um because the
tool is there and it is the tool that's
available
to um establish the uh you know to
handle these um communal or Community
issues um and we're we're not trying to
I don't think we're trying to mandate
them um I think we were more trying to
identify that that would be the tool by
which that um those the questions that
were raised last time would be addressed
yeah you know I I don't know that I have
an answer to the question as to whether
or not putting it as a finding versus a
condition
um you know has a significant difference
although you may want to talk to legal
counsel about having a a permit
condition like this as in its legal
standing because it doesn't talk about
as maybe amended but they could be
essentially eliminated too at some point
just want to I guess we don't want to
paint somebody else in the future
looking at this saying what were they
thinking back in 2014 so I I guess we
want to make sure we're being clear
about what we're trying to accomplish by
putting that condition on real quick I
just uh um while I've got the microphone
um on the chair's uh concern about
condition number seven I as I read it I
had a similar concern about okay what
does that really mean from an
Administration standpoint or an
enforcement standpoint if there's an
industry standard or something out there
that you could refer to dealing with
sensitive areas and maintenance of
landscaping within sensitive um or
environmentally sensitive areas that
probably would be a big help because
then you have something that you can
refer to from no and and I think I think
it really was a good point and we have
language that is in development
agreements and that's used as permit
conditions and I think that's where
we'll start by because that's a um u a
more tangible way of of directing what
that action means good thank you
so um this and and my only question for
uh the Commissioners is this is the end
of my presentation on the uh
mspa unless there are additional
questions from the
Commissioners okay nope too quick sorry
Mr chair so I don't know if it's maybe I
just need some help um on page it's I
was looking at through the development
agreement and it may be related to this
or not you have to tell me but there's
um discussion in the development
agreement as soon as I find the
page page eight of
28 where it talks
about the
amendment
um to the Pickering Place master plan
that authorizes is removal of other
requesting parties from the Pickering
Place Master site plan as long as they
do it before this is enacted so help me
understand what that's all about so um
so right now what city code says is if
you want sorry um so what city code says
is uh a a major amendment to a Master
site plan comes to the commission and
then is decided by the city council
and so um basically what Costco wanted
to do was with be um on that page is to
allow any other Pickering owners to take
advantage of the door that they were
opening by removing themselves from the
master site plan so as the
council makes that policy decision to
agree to remove Costco from the
Pickering Place Master site plan if any
of the other property owned owners want
to leave now too what that's saying is
that they could do that all under this
Council action so there's so what the so
in the conversations that we've had with
the city attorney is that basically we
would have to have a written request by
those other property owners so at the
time that the council passes the
ordinance or resolution to amend the
Pickering Place master site plan to
remove Costco they could potentially
remove other property owners who have
written requested that as well and so
the policy and and the rationale here
because I'm seeing a lot of fro brows
the rationale here is that Council has
already decided from a policy standpoint
they have a different vision for this
neighborhood in the city it's it's part
of the central isquat plan it's higher
density it's you know less setbacks it's
all these other things and so from a
policy standpoint they've already kind
of painted the picture of what they want
this to look like so as the property
owners want out they've really kind of
wrestled
with and so what this is saying is if
there are a number of property owners
that want to go now rather than make
them go through a separate bureaucratic
event um because that's what the code
says they could take advantage of the
door being open
right let's say you know one of the
gentlemen in and the audience want to
then be removed from the Pickering Place
Master site plan they would have to file
an application it would come to DC it
would then go to the city council and
they would have to do their own process
so that's what B is trying to say is if
anybody else wants to kind of ride the
coattails so to speak they can so they
could participate in this Bureau
complicated bureaucratic process right
now yes so
exactly so it seems to me that that
would be something that we would want to
encourage since it allows for the New
Vision to actually take shape so so so
and and and just to have this
conversation fully um maybe not fully
because I don't know that we have time
for that but um so the master site plan
the the words and I'm going to
paraphrase the City attorney so you know
basically because it's like a contract
rezone it it gives property owners
rights and so the city's not going to
take those rights away from anybody who
wants to hang on to them but if people
want to be removed from the master site
plan you know they can do that and so
you're right the more I think the more
the marrier I mean if everybody wanted
to come now and we could completely get
rid of the master site plan in its
entirety I think that would be great I
think the likelihood that all the
Pickering owners will do that is
probably low but there might be a few
whether they're in the audience or
watching at home uh that might might
take advantage of this it's it's an
opportunity this is our incentive if you
will to try and get more of them to be
removed from the master site plan
because we see that as being
advantageous in implementing the central
isqua plan okay sorry that was a long
way to go okay so towards that end would
it make sense to extend it out to say
anybody that within 12 months of The
Passage would like to do it after
they've seen what actually gets passed
in um so the conversation so we you can
see a lot of strikethroughs in this
paragraph um originally we had tried to
do something along those lines to
basically say hey if Council says this
is the right thing to do that you know
they basically kind of we could make it
more of an administrative process so
that doesn't have to be so bureaucratic
and have so many steps associated with
it basically what the City attorney said
is now it's you got to come now or you
got to do your own process later because
whether it's a resolution or an
ordinance it's going to be specific on
which properties go and it it that
window shuts when it
happens
have you contacted all the property
owners and advised them of
this I personally have not I I mean has
the city or staff made an effort to let
the property owners know that this is
one of the items I mean so I'm not sure
how many property owners are with us
tonight or watching home eating popcorn
and enjoying the show
[Laughter]
but I would think that this would be
something like the you know the old what
is it 500t radius of letting people know
stuff is going on that you might want to
put out put out a letter to everybody
saying this is something that we're
doing
and it's a good shot to get it if you're
interested in getting out and and I
don't know if Jackie wants to mention I
mean Costco has been the one talking
with the other Pickering owners about
this opportunity um there they held uh
the mayor and myself and Sheldon uh
attended a meeting maybe about two weeks
ago that they held in one of their
conference rooms for the Pickering
owners to talk about everything that's
going on and so those that attended that
meeting I think heard the message um but
I believe that um one of Costco's
Representatives has been having that
conversation with the other Pickering
owners so I believe that's happening I
just don't think the city
and and they're receiving all these
materials so they've received the
development agreement and the staff
report and and
I so not anything that specifically says
this is the Highlight that you should
note you should note um but that they
are receiving all the materials
including the master site plan Amendment
okay well receiving all of it and
understanding what is here with uh
multiple colors underlines Blues cross
throughs
yellows and everything else it's almost
impossible to read this document but I
would think a letter from the
city to the property owners I don't know
how many Property Owners we're talking
about maybe there's only three I don't
know there's there's more than three but
there's less than 20 or something you
know a letter saying this is one of the
primary issues and it's it's something
that we're trying to avoid future
bureaucracy so if you're interested or
think you might be interested this is
your time to jump on a bandwagon
okay
okay all
right um so um Keith got to start with
an apology I'm bearing mine halfway into
the program this evening I wrote you an
email last night in which I tell you
what I'm about to tell you now and
discovered that I had never hit send so
uh I apologize for that um the uh
briefing response memo that you received
had 49 issues or topics that we had
identified um grouped into the
categories of land plan development
agreement and master site plan
Amendment um typically uh and some of
you may remember this from the seventh
and Gilman staff report we would go
through each of those um topics or
issues as part of our presentation that
seemed really um long and so what we
have done is focused on eight of them
that we thought were particularly um
that the commission had focused on a lot
and so we're going to focus on those
this evening but you are of course
welcome to ask us to go back um to any
of these for more information Andor ones
that we have not brought up um we just
thought that this would um seem like the
most um important ones to focus on this
evening as part of our
presentation so the first one was
Community spaces um one of the questions
was about phasing um each building is
required to have a certain amount of
community space and that community space
would therefore come with that building
um the what is the amount of community
space required there's a certain minimum
amount that's required with each
building um the proposals are substanti
more than that minimum um in writing
this response there was something that
struck me that I wanted to point out
which is the central isqua standards
talk about two kinds of community space
there's required community space that
comes with each building and significant
Community spaces that come with each
district and the required Community
spaces seem to be more associated with
the people who are using that building
the people in the immed immediate area
uh the significant Community spaces are
really intended for the public and um
for serving the larger area and it's not
that the required Community spaces may
not be used um by other people who are
not working in that building for
instance um but really the significant
ones are I think the key ones in terms
of being public and publicly used and I
make that point just because I think we
realize
um in thinking about the questions that
were raised that maybe community space
is not a very good name for that um so
we'll just keep calling it required
Community spaces knowing that that may
not be the best
name um and I think I think the other
piece is that these are on private
property um and so it's the goal is to
try and balance being both welcoming and
respecting private property rights um
some of the questions that have come up
to us around that topic um made us think
about the Amazon uh campus um and so I
just want to talk to you a little bit
about that because I think that there's
some similarities that may provide some
information about how this might be
handled um what I've provided here are
two blocks from um South Lake Union in
Seattle um Terry is probably the most uh
well-known Street it has the street car
South Lake Union Street car on it um
the yellow circles are over s are
highlighting two of the spaces that um
Amazon has provided um there's a rather
large one here that includes a sort of
performance um space as well as a route
through the block um this one has a sort
of a lower space and an upper space um
I'm not sure exactly when this Google
aerial is from I um think it may be a
while ago because if you look at this
photo which is um this space right I'm
standing out here this way um you this
space up here is this space which
actually has building over it it's
covered um but I think the important uh
pieces to point out about this um is
that it's not unlike the kinds of spaces
that we might get which um you know this
is public RightWay and this is private
property uh when I originally took these
pictures which was probably for the
rally or Lakeside development agreement
um the spaces looked as they they do in
this photo um since then these signs
have been added the ones up in the upper
right hand corner and I don't know how
legible that is so I'll read it which
says welcome this Plaza is private
property available for public use please
share it safely and respectfully with
our tenants and your neighbors enjoy and
then at the bottom it says if you have
any questions about appropriate
activities please call and there's a
telephone number so um they these were
added in the prob the last year or so um
but to give you a sense of the way
Amazon and I'm not saying this is Costco
but the way Amazon has chosen to use
these spaces um you can see on this side
is a kind of a garden with um a green
screen because this is a blank wall and
the that's where these women are sitting
um reading or looking at some material
together um this seating area is appears
some time on this side of the plaza and
actually the group of people that are
here are a group of performers that were
part of a art on the- fly um
installation so uh that happened all
over that um area of um Amazon and part
of town so um I just put that out there
as an example of how um Community spaces
might occur on the Costco
campus are there questions before I
leave
okay uh mix of uses um there were some
questions around this the development
agreement um aots Costco one and a half
million square feet of office space
which could include up to 250,000 square
fet of other nonresidential uses we want
to be really clear the city is a big
supporter of mixed juices however the
central standards do not require that
the uses be mixed we had the same
conversation with sth and Gilman um
there was a desire and certainly support
for them to provide retail but their
choice was not to do that um and in
terms of Costco while we would like
residential to be um part of this part
of town or even part of the Costco area
um again that is not a requirement um it
is at the um choice of the property
owner so you know moving forward the
land plan does not preclude them mixing
uses they could in the future as their
business model or the way they um
Envision their campus they could choose
to mix uses for instance putting retail
on the ground floor um and residential
could be added in the future that's just
not the way it's presented right
now so just a question on this one I um
so the 250,000
additional non-residential uses as far
as um square footage is does um that
include development on the existing
warehouse store um parcel or is this it
could yes it could so they could that's
roughly 150,000 square feet now they
could take that up to 400,000 square
feet not that that model is something
that they're thinking about but that
they could have a very large retail
footprint right there sure
okay
yeah it it would be nice to see it
scattered around a little bit but I
understand okay
thank pedestrian orientation there were
a huge number of
um uh things that Rel comments and
issues that were related to pedestrian
orientation so I want to touch on a
number of those uh one is that given the
existing nature of this part of town
There's um Limited opportuni ities to
insert additional significant
circulation facilities um there's the
Pickering Pond um over here and the
isqua creek um we will be gaining a new
connection with um the new 62 road which
will be great it'll be multimodal bikes
Peds cars um which would which we're all
looking forward to um and in general the
way the what the land plan depicts is an
a Improvement in the frequency of
pedestrian connections as you remember
probably from last time there are um
connections planned between each of the
buildings um that will be generally
available to the public as well as um
connections through the buildings that
would be available to Costco employees
and their guests
um in terms of other things that impact
uh the pedestrian friendliness of an
area um the land plan shows a you know a
significant shift away from surface
parking uh currently the whole um
southern area where building 4A and 5A
are five are shown are currently surface
parking lots um building six will go
where there is a Surface parking lot uh
there will remain some small surface
parking lots in front of these buildings
as well as this one
um we feel that the central oqua
standards provides um sufficient tools
to address those small scattered parking
lots um when and if they occur um and I
think the other um piece of pedestrian
friendliness to touch on um streets and
the orientation to streets is really a
critical part of Central isqua and um
for some uses that will mean buildings
right at the back of sidewalk and um you
know for uh a very public use like a
cafe or a store that would be
appropriate But Central isqua also
recognizes that there are some uses that
have a heightened need for privacy or
security that may need to be slightly
set back from the sidewalk um and uh
offices are one of the uses and there
are quite a few references throughout
the central isqua standards about
offices being setback um a certain
amount with certain kinds of treatment
of that setback um to both provide the
security or privacy and wh while
maintaining the uh a positive character
along the
street so I I just want to go back to
one a point I raised in the last meeting
and that's regarding the trail that runs
on the east side and the kind of the
connection that occurs down at the South
east corner where uh and just looking
back at the documents that um were
provided in for the uh first meeting
that I I just think we're missing an
opportunity to really take advantage of
that trail and integrated into what
happens on these properties um it's like
I said I think used the term last time
the the project feels like it turns its
back on the trail the garage we raised
concerns about that with the garage gar
project and this project continues to
feel that way and there's no you know
creating of community space back there
um you know uh a a nice visible
connection from the trail into the
property really the only connection is
is the street the new street whatever it
was
6 I don't remember the name the street
back there but the new road and it's
just so it seems like we need to somehow
um really encourage integ ation of the
trail and inviting the people who are
using the trail to come out and um take
advantage of this part of the town so
there are a couple of elements I'd like
to point out just to see um if they um
alleviate your concerns I uh so one
point would be that there are going to
be more frequent um pedestrian
connections such as these that are
available um to the public connecting
both that trail to the the street um the
second uh point that I would make is
while it's true that the um uh what
we're calling the community spaces are
located along the street which is the
way the central Isa standards are
written
um uh and and you're right that the
central isqua standards also want us to
have a strong relationship to those
kinds of facilities like creeks and um
uh other critical areas such as a
wetland um
Costco has proposed on the
backside uh the kinds of semi-public
spaces which they have located um all
along this side of their project uh
which you know are often used for
seating there are often uh where
um uh lunch lunchrooms and other kinds
of more public uh spaces are located and
so they have shown those along the Creek
and I think our thought was that those
kind of semi-public spaces facing the
creek um met the
intent also in the answer I think that
um Costco provided and they may touch on
a little more in their
presentation um they really do see these
as four-sided buildings so it's not like
there will be a building designed with a
back towards the
creek okay does that help that helps I
guess I'm just um want to keep that as
part of a an awareness um as this
project continues to evolve in its de
development and and it's on the parking
lot so now I'm good thank
you I have a good parking
attendant um building 4A was another one
that came up and and I put it here
because uh we revised the condition and
it seemed too uh important to draw
attention to that um the comment uh the
this uh image on the left was in the
staff report and um there was a concern
that in our identifying additional
building space being provided in this
location that we might uh
impair um the op an opportunity for
additional community space or views in
Vistas which is an important part of
Central isqua so um part of what we were
responding to um with that little red
square was um Central isqua Standard
11.3 which um requires that there be 60
feet of
building extending back in each
direction from an
intersection
um and I think that we have some
concerns about that area being used for
community space one is because um these
roads may have uh some volume of traffic
on them and we already have a community
space fairly large community space shown
on either side of this road and we
really want those to be successful
however we do have some concerns also
that there may be conflicts with views
and Vistas and so we revised um just
there were a series of bullets under
condition number four and I'm not going
to make you go through them all again
but the um one related to this little um
piece right here has been revised to add
um that uh
the southern wing of building 4A needs
to fulfill the corner requirements to
the extent possible given the
intersections acute angle and
opportunities to preserve Andor
highlight views and Vistas so in other
words when we get to the point of them
proposing building 4A we see the kind of
building they're proposing really go out
and study the site with them um have our
community conversation that will be a
great time to really look in detail at
what is appropriate at that particular
corner in terms of balancing a number of
um design
standards Sky Bridges um that was
another um piece that we spent a while
talking about um and where some changes
have occurred um Costco currently has
two existing Sky Bridges one here and
one here um the land plan proposes more
essentially one between each pair of
buildings um which are the um yellow dot
dotted ovals you see up there um there
were concerns about the impact to the
critical mass of pedestrians on the
street would it feel like there are
enough people around um I think
that off
Street staff has felt that um the use of
Sky Bridges to maintain a secure campus
while allowing the permeability of or
frequent um pedestrian connections
between the street and trails seemed
like a good balance um in the sense that
if uh we did not have some of these Sky
Bridges uh what might result as an even
larger building to maintain that secure
campus um so that um to staff seemed
like an acceptable balance um there were
concerns raised around architectural
design the commission hadn't hadn't had
an opportunity to see the eight criteria
that are in the draft of the development
agreement that you received um two of
them uh we thought were uh
important um in addressing some of these
concerns uh as well as the images that
were in the staff reports and we felt
like that provided us with sufficient
tools to um make the sky Bridges a
positive architectural element I think
um where both U staff and Costco heard
the commission's concerns were um
potential impacts to um the views along
Lake Drive that we were just discussing
with building 4A and so um we uh in
talking with Costco we all agreed that
it would be appropriate to reduce the
sky bridges that were allowed outright
to cross the rideway from two to one now
they get to pick which one um but the
proposal the response back to the
commission is to reduce um uh have these
as being Alternatives not both both
allowed
outright uh just a comment about the sky
Bridges I don't know what the the
thought was um um one of the
commissioner when they made that comment
about Sky Bridges and I guess my thought
is that Sky Bridge yeah it it uh blocks
The View as we're coming down on um Lake
Drive but you know you can make that um
into something real nice where it's see
through glass and uh and partly you know
maybe put some kind of
advertising Fair uh that's going on and
that kind of thing and then let the sun
come through you can make that really
nice um and I don't think it's a
negative thing to have a sky Bridge
there and um I don't know where we're
leading by saying let's eliminate one
sky bridge and have just one and then
this one is going to be solid block no
penetration um I I don't think we want
to go that route I would agree with that
there is a requirement that the um Sky
Bridges be at least
70% um glass transl glass yeah yes yeah
yeah and and you can make a real nice
Sky bridge out of that I'm sure Costco
or M can be creative about that yeah so
that's just my
comments sure I'll I'll just try I I I
get very conflicted about this because I
could understand the desire to move
people between buildings easily and out
of the weather and so forth so forth but
the
um a big part of the central esqua plan
was to activate The Pedestrian
experience and create a better
pedestrian world than the 70%
development of parking lots that we had
and to the extent that we take people
and put them in the sky Bridges Crossing
around we have fewer people out
experiencing The Pedestrian world and I
know it gets rainy and dark and
everything around here
but um I think when you showed the
pictures of the Amazon campus I don't
remember any Sky Bridges they have down
there and lots of people out on the
street so I get very conflicted I can
understand the desire to do it uh but I
I don't think it fits with the central
isqua plan
intent so just uh I'll weigh in since I
weighed in on this I think at the last
meeting a bit um I appreciate the
movement toward and recognizing you know
there
are challenges be between meeting kind
of multiple interests here in the in
Costco's desire for a secure campus
convenient comfortable access to and
from
buildings um so you know I'm not going
to fall on my sword on this one but I I
Sky Bridges across public properties and
across public roads continues to be I'm
not a fan um for exactly the reasons
that commissioner Morgan expressed and
and just from a uh experience as you're
traveling the street um I think
architecturally you can make them
interesting I think one of my concerns
last time was some of the examples that
were provided in the packet weren't so
exciting um so some work would need need
to be done to make it uh something
that's an interesting um feature and not
just a glass horizontal glass tube um so
I I guess uh at at this point I think
we've made progress I think you need to
be very strategic about how you locate
Sky bridges too I think once you're back
on the private property I don't know
that I have a big issue with that I
think that what you talked about in the
way it allows for buildings to be
separated so you don't have long large
mass building to provide that security
at the same time I'm not I don't work
for Costco so I'm not quite sure how
they are organized and how they have to
travel between buildings but generally
departments are together and from time
to time they need to travel from one
department or one building to another um
but it just from my point of view um
less or no Sky Bridges is better than
more sky Bridges so um but I appreciate
the effort to really work through this a
bit and respond to the commission's
concerns so
thanks
and if I I'll throw in a clarification
too the the between buildings on the
property itself I'm fine with that it's
the it's the one over the right of way
and maybe one possibility would be to to
design the possibility like the one
skybridge that shown in the lower
picture designed the possibility of
having one but not allow it unless it
was shown that there was a risk if
there's too much traffic on the road and
a risk of conflict with pedestrians and
traffic that they could show that it
would be better to have people away from
that
traffic maybe be able to allow it later
on
so thank
you okay and if I'm I just have to throw
two cents in just because I do um so so
the thing about it is um you know Sky
bridges for all the reasons you guys
have said has it's kind of a it can
detract from what we're trying to do on
the street um I think we all recognize
that Costco is looking for um some
security on their campus and having
those buildings connected via skybridge
you know actually adds some value versus
building really giant buildings you know
where you basically could put the same
amount of square footage in one building
or you could break it into two and
connect it with the skybridge you could
say well I'd rather have the two smaller
Footprints connected by skybridge
because then there's views and other
things that happen in between um my
worry about potentially wrapping this
around pedestrian safety is now you're
potentially opening the door for Sky
Bridges throughout all of kind of CIP so
just I just want to kind of throw that
out there is I I think we want to be
careful with Sky Bridges I think used
for particular purposes in limited
spaces could be okay but the pler of sky
Bridges throughout isqua would probably
not be what any of us in this room want
so that was my two
cents I think your a question about or
your sighting of Amazon was probably apt
relative to that point there's probably
as many people moving around that campus
and having to move between blocks as
there um is here so probably The
Pedestrian conflict wouldn't be the the
um Tipping Point shall we
say okay okay
um um sepa or the State Environmental
Policy Act uh that was you guys had a
lot of questions around that so um
hopefully this will help to clarify that
um Central isap uh had an environmental
impact statement or Eis and that
established a development threshold for
the urban core of 2.4 million square
feet of commercial without additional
sea
review so um that means that those
impacts have been looked at and as a
planned action ordinance there's a you
you're generally saying does is this
consistent what was with what was shown
in the Eis and if it was then that's the
extent of sea review um and typically
when you do these kinds of um
environmental impact
statements as businesses come in it's on
a first come for basis and um Costco was
part of developing that Eis and so um
they are
first um Pickering place um 1.5 million
square feet that we've been talking
about is a subset of the overall 2.4
million square fet that was anticipated
in the urban core uh there was other
uses that were reviewed in the Eis for
the urban core including almost um 5,000
multif family units and almost 500,000
square feet of service and
Retail um but I think there are a couple
of points to make here one is that this
is a 30-year plan and um will have to be
Revisited um periodically which may uh
necessitate additional environmental
review or consideration by the
city um the other thing is that um if a
project exceeds that uh threshold uh
that doesn't necessarily mean there's
another Eis um what it means is that
there has to be a review to determine if
there are
unanticipated um
impacts uh and there may or may not be
and so um that would be the action that
would be necessary um if a project
wanted to propose something beyond what
was already covered in the
Eis
oh and um Mel asked a question um in an
email earlier today um rally is a
separate had a separate environmental
impact statement so they are not a
subset of this uh
threshold great things see so the 1.5
million square feet
it the package said it would use
up Ed up much of the office square
footage
what how much is
much well so the the total is 2.4
million and this is 1.5 so that leaves
900,000 square feet of commercial in the
urban core so you if somebody came in
and wanted to build a million square
feet of office they or 900,000 they
could it's it doesn't have to
be
just service retail tell 500,000
or right there is still additional
unused
uh uh square footage that was reviewed
as part of the Eis so if if you came in
let's say you came in and and the
package right now is there's an extra
half a million square feet of retail and
let's assume that somebody came in and
said you know I don't want to do a half
a million s feet of retail I want to do
250,000 ft of office okay so what you
need to do is basically you you take a
look at the impacts of office versus
retail and for the most part office is
less impacting than retail retail is a
higher trip generator um you'd basically
take a look and see if doing that caused
any impacts that weren't already
addressed in the central isqua plan um
Eis if the answer is no then you're kind
of out the door and you're good if if
let's say it does generate an impact
that wasn't evaluated with the original
Eis you would have to do additional
environmental review so do so does it
mean that that anybody that wants to do
any office if this is approved any
proposed Office Buildings in the
central are in the urban core would have
to go through that process outside of
rowy and of Ry Costco no there's still
because this is only 1.5 there was
2.4 right right is it does the 24 is 24
just office or is the two4 it's just
commercial so which includes office but
does not include the 497 of right
service retail that's separate oh okay
so there's 900 out there well there's
900 right of commercial which would
include office okay and then almost 500
of service retail gotcha and then and
4,800 of multif family right so to take
Keith's example if someone came in and
said I want to do a million MH you could
take the
900,000 of commercial and then for the
other 100,000 look at the retail and
whether there were unmitigated impacts
got um or not so somebody comes in wants
to do 200,000 it fits within the
24 you're still okay right all right
so I guess one of the thoughts I had
about this my concern one of the
concerns would
be 15 years down the
road everything's going great things are
being built out Costco's built a million
square feet of more space they still
have a half a million square feet in
their
pocket and everything else is built out
and do they sort of sit there and hold
the cards of everybody else's sort of
stuck in the queue not being able to do
something and wondering if there's a way
to uh I guess revisit this down the road
to say okay if it if it hasn't built
let's say they don't build anything out
for 15 years if it's just sitting there
undeveloped is there a way for the city
to go back and say we need to rethink
this reservation of all that square
footage so I'd answer that a couple
different ways one is I mean if if
developers are knocking down our doors
to build in central isqua plan then I
think what that telling me is the
Market's great and we don't need to do a
thing let the market figure itself out
because it doesn't mean just because the
entitlement that was evaluated with the
Eis is done that that puts a moratorium
on development in the rest of the city
it just means that additional sepa has
to be done and the advantage of having
the planned action ordinance is gone if
on so but let's take a different
scenario and 15 years from now Costco is
doing whatever they're doing and let's
just it doesn't matter uh but let's say
that we have another project on Gilman
that wants to happen and doesn't because
you know it's it's it's on the Tipping
Point on whether it makes sense for the
developer and you know the environmental
review is going to take a long time and
it's kind of a discouragement the city
could choose to do another Eis to
entitle that next block of development
that would then clear the way for more
properties to redevelop under the CIP so
the city could take the the initiative
to help facilitate that next phase
beyond the first 2.4 million that was
evaluated with the initial planned
action e so it doesn't mean that it's at
the end it means that we all get to like
look at it and decide you know should we
help incent additional development or is
the market doing what it should and and
it's we primed the pump with Costco and
with Rowley and some other things and
now it's it's going on its own great
okay
okay uh development commission's role in
the review of future
permits um so there were some questions
around this this is a slightly different
process than um what happened with uh
other Central isqua permits and so uh I
want to unpack that a little bit um the
land plan which is before you right now
is really the commission's opportunity
to review and approve a permit and this
is similar to other land use permits in
that sense some information such as
specific designs for the landscape the
community spaces in the buildings are
not included in the land plan drawings
um however um we have imagery um which
were the photo sheets that uh Costco
provided as well as the existing campus
which um do Set uh um sort of minimum
minum bar and the character and the
design that would um be employed uh for
those future phases uh future buildings
and in addition to um this review the
commission and the public would have
another opportunity to uh comment on the
proposals as they come in in the future
assuming that they're over 150,000 sare
ft because that is the threshold that
Central isqu at for for what has public
um review versus administrative only
review sorry I have a lot of questions
tonight um Sorry so this is an area I
got a little hung up last time because
we're still trying to get comfortable
with the process changes that occurred
with the central isqua plan so bear with
me here a little bit so in this
particular instance we are going through
a process of reviewing as you said the
images and essentially the site
layout um and we're going to make a
recommendation to the council who is the
authority the decision-making Authority
for development agreements so I
understand that there will be multiple
buildings that will come back through
for entitlements for well for
construction permits as this um as
Costco proceeds with their office Park
development or their office
um um campus so but those when they're
over 150,000 would come back here for a
Community Conference we would give our
two cents and then then staff um would
make the ultim would be the decision
maker the director um or whoever the
designated Authority is okay so is that
an accurate restatement of what you just
said okay I got it that was actually way
more detailed than what I said thank you
the other the other process for let's
just say it's a separate parcel of
property it's in the central isqua plan
area and it's over 50,000 Square fet it
comes to the development commission
we'll do a Community Conference but
we're also the decision maker for
those entitlements is that right so no
there's a a slight adjustment so
um like this permit they only come once
you don't get a Community Conference
that's an option that an applicant could
choose to take um but a community
conference is no longer required okay um
but you would be on those um in this
case it's a Consolidated permit so the
council is the decision maker but the
council is really looking to the
commission as you normally do to provide
the really in-depth review of the land
use permit uh with those uh say seventh
and Gilman as we take an example uh you
are the decision maker but you're doing
the same kind of review that you're
doing now um a Community Conference
would not occur with SE didn't occur
with seventh and Gilman and would not
have to occur with any other buildings
over 150,000 Square F feet okay under
150,000 square feet they wouldn't even
come to the commission that's right so
and just a Nuance point because I think
it's an important one is if Costco so
let's assume those three buildings that
are on their land plan end up being four
story buildings you know that if you do
the math that accounts for only about
half of the entire ement that Costco is
getting with their development agreement
which means that the other 750,000
Square ft is going to be built on
buildings that are not part of the land
plan those assuming they're done in
150,000 square foot increments or more
they would come to DC for a decision
like any other property in the central
isqua plan area
right since they're outside of the area
that's defined within this land plan
plan that will be approved as part of
the development agreement yes but you
just said 750,000 actually we're giving
them 1.5 million square ft so I think
what Keith is trying to say is maybe not
very
clearly I'm just maybe I'm tired tonight
these four buildings are shown on the
land plan and assuming that they stay
basically as they're shown um these
you're reviewing and approving these
buildings now but they could be between
four and 10 stories that's what they've
been shown as if they're 10 stories
they're done they will have used all
their 1.5 million if they're four
stories there's a bunch of uh uh
allowable development that is not
accounted for and would show up
someplace else uh and that would go
through the process just like the
seventh and Gilman projected okay so
where I'm going with this is the level
of detail that we're we're working at
with the land plan review versus the
level of detail that we're typically
working on previously prior to the
central isqu plan is significantly
different where we had architectural
renderings much more detail material
selections were were part of the review
Etc and so uh this is really we're
moving the blocks around on the property
and that's about the extent of our
review and I'm simpli oversimplifying a
little bit just to make my point so it
it's um
there's the the shift here is a huge
movement toward relying on professional
staff for the review and and um away
from what was a level a detail level
review by the commission so our role has
fundamentally changed when it comes to
the central isqua plan
permits so um I I'm I'm just going to
be kind of picky here for a second if if
it's not on the land plan you'll see it
at the level of review that we are
currently reviewing permits you're
absolutely right that the level of
review that the commission was doing
prior to Central isqua was significantly
more even if this was I mean as you
discovered with seventh and Gilman there
is still a level of detail that is not
we're we're not going to almost
construction permits to um review a land
use permit um so there um is a
more conceptual I'm not sure if that's
the right word a revie uh point at which
the commission is a being asked to weigh
in um you are correct that um those
detailed elevations and community space
plans um are not shown um and the
um substitute maybe uh for that that
we're proposing um is the existing camp
um because the the point is to continue
that that may not be sufficient to you I
just want to be clear that that's why
why that was brought for but just to
clarify again this is I'm I'm just
trying to understand I don't know if I
have a point here I'm just trying to
understand so if for this particular
review this is the level of detail we're
operating at to make the recommendation
to the council who make the decision for
other projects that are outside of the
land plan that's being contemplated here
or considered here over 100 50,000
Square ft the level of detail we will
get though in those reviews will be at
more granular level than what we're
getting here is that I would expect it
would be similar to seventh and Gilman
okay because that was our exp that fair
yeah seventh and seventh and Gilman was
less detailed than we were previously
getting but it was more detailed than
yes okay yes so in this case we're
saying okay staff you know we're
weighing in with our you know um areas
of emphasis Etc but it really is going
to be a professional review that's going
to we're going to have to rely on for
implementation so we're have to have
confidence that's happening yes and no
and and this may not be again satisfying
um I think that was um the importance
that we placed on bringing it back to
the commission and having an opportunity
to hear public and commission
perspective on um does this meet Central
isqua is this consistent with the land
plan does this meet those expectations
you're right it is not a decision-making
role um but it is not sta uh thank you
professional staff um it's not just
professional staff operating completely
uh back of house uh we would be bringing
it forward to get that input yeah no I I
appreciate that I'm I'm good thanks that
that helps me a lot and I guess the way
I understand it too is what what we're
saying is Well the the imagery that you
providers the the current campus what
they've built does that essentially
become part of the the land plant itself
then because I I understand the idea
we've said Costco's built some really
nice buildings that I think if they if
we said those were what are these are
going to look like I think they would
sort of fit everybody's criteria and
what you're going to be doing is saying
are they going to build something of
this quality fenestration all that and
so would this be in essence part of the
land plan absolutely that is part of the
land plan and I
think um you know that's I think part of
the value that we see in bringing it
back we may say okay that's a similar
level of detail and quality of materials
and detailing and the commission might
say no we don't think it is for the
following reasons and that's a that's a
conversation that we want to
have okay I guess I sort of feel
comfortable enough that they built some
really nice stuff so keep doing doing
that you sure ask a lot of good
questions Mike yeah which Dove tail into
what I'm going to ask now we're
approving this land plan with
configuration
concept blocks of buildings which I'm
sure there's a lot of study that went
into it based on the configuration of
the building um when when the plants are
put together for one building um why is
it not coming back to the commission for
review so if the building is
150,000 Square ft or more uh it will
come back for commission input MH um it
just would not be for a decision because
you're making the decision
now yeah but the decision is to approve
or recommend approval of the land
plan um and there's some a lot of talks
about Trails time into the building the
the sky Bridge you know everybody has
their own concept of how it should be
how it why it shouldn't be there and
that kind of thing I have my my way of
thinking how the trail ties into it you
know we talked about little retail shops
you know everybody has their own concept
but um and so yeah there's that limit of
150,000 square feet then it comes back
here but right now we're kind of asked
to
recommend concept
based on those blocks and how's the
block you know there's a lot of details
that needs to go in before it becomes a
viable uh uh
Place uh enjoyable place so I guess you
know I'm with 150 square feet how many
stories are we talking
about
four uh yes probably yeah well actually
Four would I think be 240 thou I think
they're about a 60,000 foot floor plate
more or less so I say four you know and
to tie it with the trail you know I have
my concept of how retail ties into the
trail coffee shop lunchtime kind of
sitting around that kind of and not
Warehouse Costco retail so everybody has
their own concept of how it should be so
I guess
um you know I I feel uncomfortable in a
way or maybe I'm not understanding the
you know we're approving land plan but
yet there's still a lot of
unworked details that's not worked out
so if I can offer something so so
there's there's there's some choices
that you guys have and I just want to
make sure you guys kind of know the
ground rules as we're going through this
so right now the development agreement
has proposed language on how all this is
going to work you guys at the end of the
day could recommend no we don't like
that particular piece want we want to be
the decision maker on every permit in
excess of 150,000 ft you guys have the
ability to make that recommendation at
the end of the day right now I've got DC
review up on the parking lot part of you
know if if if you guys are going to go
down that path it's helpful for us to
know what the issues are um I think
there's been some conversations about it
does move the bar you know as Mike
mentioned earlier this is this is moving
the bar a little bit and you know are
you guys I think need to gauge are you
giving up any of the responsibilities
that you're tasked with in terms of
reviewing you know site development
permits in the city and and if so let's
talk about that because I think Costco
who has proposed this process and and
you know staff I think believe that you
guys get to see the pieces that that you
should have input on in on but if there
are pieces um Ray that that you don't
feel comfortable with because this is
too conceptual for you then then throw
that out to us let us you know let us
hear that so that we can talk about that
and see if there's some things that we
can offer that might help you get over
that hump and feel that you know what I
I get it if they want to build those
buildings like that we've talked about
the penetrations we we we know generally
how tall they are we know where the
parking is you know I've got pictures
I've got imagery of existing Costco
buildings I'm good or I'm not good and
here's why I'm not good it's helpful for
us to kind of have that level of of
clarity if you can provide it and again
at the end of the day if if this is just
not something that you're comfortable
with you know as we collect the
recommendation out of you guys you know
you don't have to support that you can
say I I support all of this but I don't
support that yeah yeah well and and one
thing I would add is if m and Mel AR mud
wrestle or arm wrestle and they we we
come to a draw we can also send that
forward you know that that there isn't a
um consensus among the Commissioners and
those are the kinds of topics that then
we will carry forward that
recommendation to land Ure and on to the
council because these are the kinds of
things you guys have more experience
with the these kinds of issues
adjustments interpretations Etc and that
this is really what looking for from you
is based on your experience where where
things make sense and where things raise
concerns and whether we can address
those or not yeah and and that's great
you know Keith you clarified that very
well and so uh I guess the point that I
was trying to make is that um yeah
you're right it feels uncomfortable to
approve blocks of buildings that just
blocks and then just let it go and so I
guess to to kind of ease the Comfort
level here the
fear Lucy can you go back to that slide
with the
buildings it's my understanding the land
use that these are conceptual ideas of
what the buildings will be like doesn't
mean they're going to look like
that I mean it doesn't mean they're
going to be like a an eye and whatever
that thing is in the corner and maybe
the only one that's really probably
fixed would be the curved one the other
ones could
vary what we're being asked to do is
approve them they're going to be over
150,000 Square ft so it would come back
to
us to give
our feelings about what the modulation
is and the color scheme and the windows
and the sky Bridges
but we wouldn't have a decision we would
just give that would just be
input that would go where we could make
say well we don't really like the way
that building looks we think you should
have more
modulation what happens so um staff
would
um to be honest we get lots of comments
from you some of which are related to
the central isqua standards and some of
which are other things that you want
tell us that we're glad to hear the ones
that are related to the central isqua
standards which are the tools that we
have to review by we're going to take
pretty seriously so let's say you know
it comes in as a completely round or or
this building the these two buildings
become one big monolith and it comes
right up behind the street and there's
no community space there we might come
back to you and say we don't think this
is consistent with the land plan we
think that it should go back through as
if it's a brand new building that wasn't
part of the land plan um I I'm I'm not
saying that's what we would I'm not sure
exactly what those triggers are we would
have to face that at the time and what
that's part of the reason that we wrote
the staff report and we provided that
chart looking at each of the standards
in Central isqua and evaluating which
ones would be evaluated with future
permits and which we think have been
addressed now on the other hand that big
monolith could come
in and you could say yeah that's fine by
us it's close enough and everybody on
the staff here would say that's not what
we thought we were dealing with yeah
then what happens I think there's a I
think there's a reality here that said
you you're not indiscriminately making
decisions on and I recognize that those
are blocks but but those blocks are
constrained by the Central isquad
Development design standards I mean
there's it's not cart blanch you can't
you there's that's what the whole the
value of the central isqua plan plan and
the Cs were is to is to be able to set
the parameters and they are more
conceptual than being able to see all
the on the ground stuff but that but
there's a context and a framework that
they have to comply with and we do have
the responsibility to look at whatever
is proposed and say that's not
consistent with what the standards are
and even go be so bold as to say you
guys missed it there you're there's a a
design standard here a parameter that
that you're kind of letting go and we
think you ought to reinforce that right
and so really I I I there's going to be
that conversation there is going to be
um I think the question is do you feel
that it's necessary to have and and this
is I'm just stating this I'm there's no
judgment associated with it do you feel
that you need to have the
decision-making authority to make it
happen or do you feel that the ability
to have that conversation is sufficient
and and you know that that kind of is
the question and by setting certain
framework through the land plan is that
sufficient to um guide that future
conversation or not and you know that's
we we're we've put something out there
we're having a conversation about it and
this is what we need to be hearing and
it's on the parking
[Laughter]
lot go on a long time on this one so
let's move on and and I think there's I
mean you guys this has been a good
conversation and I've got a ton of stuff
in my head and we could spend the next
hour talking about it but I need to talk
about it with them and we'll do that
tomorrow and part of all of this is
getting back to you guys on what
hopefully will be the Silver Bullet um
so that's the
goal so I'm handing it over to my fine
colleague from New Orleans to talk about
the
mtfa let's just say who's
that hi Shel I'm nicer than
he I was noticing nobody was standing up
nobody want to say I'm from New Orleans
sorry
voila just to remind folks thank you uh
I'm Sheldon Lynn with the Department of
Public Works engineering and a question
came up about you know what are these
projects that are incorporated into the
master Transportation financing
agreement and essentially there are
three projects uh that are incorporated
into it uh there's what uh I term as
kind of the anchor project which is a
new road uh connection between East Lake
manage Parkway and Lake
Drive uh essentially it's a
reconstruction and realignment of
Southeast 62nd Street here creating a
new intersection with the undercrossing
that came in this way a few years back
221st and an extension of Southeast 6
62nd Street all the way over to here uh
this is a widening as well to
accommodate the large volumes of traffic
for turning movements and so forth uh in
here as well as it's going to have
multimodal facilities along the north
side connecting into the East Lake
samamish
Trail
um this section of Road uh from here to
here is about 2,000 ft long I it's going
going to be constructed uh primarily
about half of it is a bridge structure
to avoid the environmental constraints
and so forth through here uh it will be
a raised Bridge structure uh and then an
intersection and then coming back in
here with a 23 Lane uh facility uh
because of the volumes of traffic and
turning movements into the planned
Costco building here the roadway section
up here is going to have have uh bike
Lanes three lanes of traffic and curb
gutter sidewalk and Landscaping as well
uh trying to fit something in where uh
there's existing development and the
like uh to do our best to meet the core
Street standards
uh you'll you'll note that I did not
include bicycle Lanes on this road uh
due to the high cost of the bridge
structure and so forth we're going to
enhance the the Pickering Trail through
here uh right now it's only about 8 to
10 ft wide on this side of the creek and
we're going to widen it to about 12 to
14 ft wide to allow for multimodal use
and the bicycle facilities and
pedestrians uh will be allowed you know
will be connected into the TR Trail and
they can use the trail to reach and make
their way Westward or come Eastward and
come over here to this intersection so
uh oh another component of this is is
that the current uh crossing of the East
Lake samamish Trail is at grade with the
existing roadway there's going to be a
grade separated Crossing for the East
Lake samamish Trail the road is going to
go over the top of the trail uh so there
won't be any pedestrian conflicts and
the Regional Trail can move a lot
smoother
the the other uh larger the next largest
project in the suite of improvements is
East Lake samamish
Parkway that one uh it's currently
constrained in capacity heading
southbound uh by only one lane of
traffic going Southbound through here
through the entire length of the project
essentially the Project's going to add a
bike lane add a lane of traffic
southbound and curb gutter sidewalk and
Landscaping on the west side of thex
mamish Parkway as well as intersection
improvements here to improve the
operations of that
intersection this project is completely
designed and we're going to be starting
the RightWay acquisition process here
and in the next few
months uh with anticipated construction
next
year the smallest of the three projects
in the uh Suite of improvements is over
here at 12th and sr900 and Northwest
samamish Road uh and we have a large
degree of congestion through this for
Ingress and egress into the Pickering
area as well as holiday and tul City
Hall Northwest uh this project is going
to include bike Lanes on both both sides
of the 12th Avenue coming through here
and it's going to add a left turn pocket
coming this way turning towards I90 uh
currently there's a single left turn
pocket so there will be a double left
turn pocket in the future to reduce the
cues through there and allow improved
operations for this signal the purple
line right here on sr900 is actually
going to be an added right turn lane
only currently there's two lanes one of
them is a through right we're going to
create a dedicated right-and turn
movement in there again to help the
operations that signal and traffic to be
able to move more freely through this
Corridor as well as uh Ingress and
egress into the
Picker these projects together are
roughly $50 million in cost
estimated so that's kind of the the
overview yeah what kind of time schedule
are you looking at Sheldon time schedule
on this I mentioned uh the East leage
Parkway hopefully starting construction
next year uh we expect all these
projects to be finished by 2020
2020 thank
you I've got a question and I I know
Keith you may be able to answer it
because it it dealt with the letter
response to Mr Williamson I'm glad I
came back then yeah I am too and and I
looked for it and I I didn't I couldn't
find it in the red blue yellow green
cross
out development but the last sentence on
reserving Transportation certificate
violates the
law it felt about Costco's contribution
of 20 24 mil thereabouts MH and then
that should Costco elect to build less
than 15 million square
ft then they have over mitigated for
traffic impacts and the draft
development agreement contemplates their
ability to be reimbursed for any
overpayment can you explain that to me
that means that Costco says they're
going to give us 24
million if they build out fully to what
the plan is if they build out half of of
that then they're going to want 12
million
back
and where does that come from so I mean
where it who makes up the difference so
the concept right now is that you know
because because of the timing if you
look at exhibit H which is the mtfa the
timing for Costco's payment goes
concurrently with Public Works building
those streets that's expected to happen
in the next six years so as as Sheldon
gets out there with his shovel and
starts building these roads he's going
to be invoicing Costco and they're going
to be paying their $23.75 million to
cover their fair share let's assume that
10 years from now Costco's buil half of
their entitlement and they decide
because of downturn people working out
of their house we all becoming midgets I
don't know that they don't need as much
square footage and so they now have over
mitigated because they've participated
in building roads that are going to go
unused by them and so the concept here
is they should be able
to monetize that investment in public
infrastructure in some way now what this
says is that they could potentially sell
those trips to other
developers that could then instead of
paying that their traffic impact fees
they could buy those trips from
Costco and then it's basically like
transferring a concurrency certificate
from one developer to another and then
they come to the city and say we own now
900 trips and instead of having to pay
those to the city um to get our
concurrency we can now build because
we're taking advantage of what we bought
from Costco that's it in a very loose
and non-legal way TDR
kind of like
tdrs so it's not
really a kickback of
money it's not really a I mean so Costco
would get paid for their investment in
the public
streets by a developer of some sorts and
it could be the city now let's and and
if and if there was
no developers that wanted to buy those
then then they just wait they just wait
and that that's spelled out clearly
there's no guarantee here that I that I
read so they can't
force you can't force they can't force
the city to buy it back no that's not in
here not in any color
okay I said I saw the thing on trips and
stuff like that but I didn't know if
that was dealt with the money yes you
know so I mean there's so the
conversation we've had with Costco is
they believe that they want to build
continue to build expand their campus in
isqua you know I mean I think what they
were saying is what happens if we don't
build 1.5 and and this was just a way
for them to possibly recoup some of
their investment there's no guarantee
here okay thank you yeah I have a
question um I guess May for Jerry it it
keeps getting mentioned about the $23.7
million that they're putting up but when
I look at the numbers it's the 237 is
the first
48% and then the city kicks in two and a
half and then Costco kicks in two and a
half so when I add those up I get the
26.2 million and I keep wondering it
sounds like to me like reading it that
they're committing to 26 million not 23
I'm missing something the the other
items are a contingency amount above
what's estimated so if the project has
justifiable reasons where we have you
know the budget needed to be increased
over the estimates that we have today
the city has requested and Costco has
partnered said yeah we'll help share in
that risk up to 10% over what your
current estimate is and so that's where
you get the two and a half and the two
and a half and the incentive is that you
know they want the city to take the
first two and a half because it's an
incentive one for us to be a little bit
more diligent hopefully to keep the
project in line and cost uh and keep it
on schedule and then
the the other component is is the second
two and a half Costco would bear that
burden on their own and then if it
really just goes out of sight the city
takes the responsibilities over that
okay great so that's a contingency
factor it's a sharing in the risk of
schedule materials cost labor costs
things like that great perfect so it's
not an optional item for them if it goes
no that's non option those are
non-optional things the scope of the
projects are defined in the mtfa under
the exhibit H2 I think it's called Uh
and that's the scope of the project
thank you and um I hope this isn't too
off topic but since we have you there
can I ask about uh future expectations
of an O I90 overpass that would connect
in Lake
Drive oh that's way off topic
no uh you're you're speaking of the 12th
Avenue over Crossing and I give a big
circle here uh that's shown in the
central isall plan I that is still on
the radar screen and I believe there's
been comments both at land and Shore as
well as infrastructure committee about
with the expansion areas and things like
that and if expansion occurred in this
area by Costco the land plans and so
forth as uh get developed for this area
need to consider how The Landings and
accommodating for the 12 Avenue of
overcrossing and that's those are that's
future land use planning that we need to
be cognizant of as development proposes
uh in this
area
okay next
SL so um
actually Sor that's okay um so that's
that's my coverage of the eight topics
with help from a friend phone a friend
um Costco um before we move on to sort
of other questions um Costco wanted to
do a
presentation uh Jackie is going to be
doing
this um you just use the keys to go up
and down and if you can point using the
mouse great thank you Lucy Mr chairman
members of the commission Jackie Frank
um vice president of real estate
development for Costco Wholesale I
wanted to um take a a slightly different
approach but hit many of the same topics
that Lucy Lucy covered this evening
first of all I want to say that um
this uh development agreement is very
important to us and and we believe that
it's important to the city um isqua is
our home and uh from a corporate point
of view and for many of us
personally um I kind of want to take it
from the top because it's it's kind of
who who we are and and what we do and
and how we how we uh how we run our
business um first of all as you know our
our job is to continually provide our
members with quality goods and services
at the at the lowest possible prices and
the way we do this is number one to obey
the law number two take care of our
members three take care of our employees
number four respect our suppliers and
our partners um and if we and if we do
all of these things correctly uh we
believe ultimately at the end of the day
we're going to reward our
shareholders so how does this um how is
this re relevant to our discussion this
this evening well first of all let's
obey the law we've demonstrated a
consistent track record um to adhere to
and to exceed the requirements of the of
the MSP over time which at the time we
were implementing the city's Vision um
and going forward we're committed to
implementing the central isqua plan and
the uh Central isqua Development design
standards and through that manifesting
the city's vision for an urban
um and a dense more dense and a vibrant
environment what this does for us it
allows Costco taking advantage of the
CIP um to to do real infill development
for higher densities consistent with the
with the uh CIP and the SIDS as you know
we've grown as a company um we've we've
as I mentioned last time we've become
the second largest retailer in the
country the third largest in in the
world and we're currently ranked number
19 in the Fortune
500
um as we grow locations and grow our
ancillary businesses we need to add
Central support to support the growth of
our business it's very simple under the
original
MSP um back from
87 um as Lucy said back in 2002 we ran
out of capacity we ran out of the
ability to add a single square foot of
development to our campus from a
development point of view and as we
continue to grow and evolve the only
option available to us under the MSP was
to lease nearby buildings so there was
late Place one there was late place two
there was the space Labs property and
and now the Microsoft uh buildings
building at the uh at the Vulcan
development under the
da The increased densities allow us to
accommodate future business growth it
allows us to consolidate our employees
and most importantly it allows us the
ability to realize synergies and
efficiencies that are inherent in a
purposefully designed campus now the
history of the da is pretty simple in
2007 we became a member of the city's
committee to consider re the resoning of
the valley floor me members of that task
force up to 2012 we participated in the
city's visioning process and we and we
provided um input to the to the
development commission as well as the
city council for the proposed uh
development design standards and
beginning in 2013 we worked very closely
with staff um in applying the SIDS to
our campus through a development
agreement and that's why we're here
tonight as far as some of our other
codes of Ethics taking care of our
employees and respecting our suppliers
um as a as a high priority to us over
the past 20 years we've demonstrated the
ability to develop within your
regulations to create a first class
corporate campus now we're not a
developer who Who develops and flips
we're a long-term participant we're a
long-term partner um and as I've said
over the past 20 years we've kept all of
our
promises as evidenced by the continuity
the consistency the commitment to
Quality the commitment to land
stewardship to Quality architecture to
Landscaping to community amenities to
traffic pedestrian
circulation um all in the context of the
natural environment the the habitat esar
creek creek like samamish Etc at the
same
time this is a private development but
it's it's a private development in the
sense that programmatically it's meant
to serve as a secure safe efficient
International headquarters to thousands
of
employees and also our vendors and
supplier community who frankly spend a
lot of time here in the isqua
community the MSP established the theme
and the pattern of development beginning
in
1987 the SIDS implementing the vision of
the CIP allows for the next growth
opportunity for higher density Community
amenities circulation paths building on
the context previously established both
with the existing Street patterns and
the surrounding natural environment this
is not a scrape and rebuild scenario
that would be wasteful and we're not
about waste we're about
efficiency this is truly an infill
development opportunity in the context
of marrying the existing conditions
while implementing the city's vision and
the more Urban Development standards and
yet although a privately owned corporate
campus there are no walls there are no
Gates there are no fences there are no
barriers per se many people use the
amenities associated with the ISRO Creek
Trail um the barn Environ enironment and
the pond Trail it's fairly it's actually
fairly heavily used by the
public we've integrated this into the
integrated into this context are The
Pedestrian connections the employee
plazas places to linger places to eat
places to play and places to work our
property is not a Civic facility or a
public park yet it's an awesome place to
work what i' what I'd like to do is show
you a few things
things and this goes to the point of
trying to not only meet or exceed the
previous development requirements but
also to keep our promises over the
years so when we look at uh at buildings
we built and how we Define
entrances we look at uh building three
um with uh with entrances as
well um we also look at how the
buildings uh sit on the side s and uh
and create community space or Plaza
space for for our employees and our
guests this happens to be um adjacent to
the um to the
pond um as well as um on the back side
of building three adjacent to the to the
pond area um an integrated Plaza that's
you know heavily used for uh for dining
for lingering for meetings um
Etc and we even have places for uh for
play um part of our uh this is just this
past week and our employees at lunch are
notorious for uh pickup basketball games
now we also use the plazas for uh for U
uh product mockups for for uh uh showa
to Showcase uh uh items that were for
sale but but uh but we also do uh uh
have designed and integral uh
recreational opportunities for our
employees and their
guests um
within the context of the Pickering
development of course is the community
ampi Amphitheater which which does get
used and is and is quite well
integrated and you can see small
gathering and small seating places that
separate both the plaza area and the
natural pond area um Lush Landscaping
benches uh low-scale lighting you know a
a real sensitivity to to scale and to
detailing and to texture and and
opportunities for people to you know at
to stop somewhere as they're on their
way somewhere
else as far as pedestrian connections
are concerned here's an image of the uh
of the isqua trail um adjacent to isqua
Creek um I think I think what you'll
find is that we have not turned our back
to anything um on the contrary U the
Landscaping is Lush and Rich um and we
as we as it was said earlier we've
designed our buildings with four-sided
architecture Ure with h with sensitive
Plaza placements um to to to not only uh
not turn our back to it but to actually
integrate in such a way that there that
you know we can we can coexist within
the context of the natural environment
um uh in a in an appropriate way without
barriers without fences Without
Walls another shot uh looking South um
on the uh on the pond Trail
and another view quite quite lovely and
and frankly quite heavily used