walking up there all the time and yep
all right I'd like to call
to order July 19th we're going to be
discussing the draft design manual
chapters we have some administrative
business to do we have some minutes to
approve on January 8th if I hope you've
had a chance to read them if anybody has
or changes or recommendations I'd be
listening to them now mr. chair move we
approve the minutes of the June 8th
meeting second any discussion all those
in favor approving the minutes say aye
aye aye opposed okay so we're ready to
review the draft design manual and
chapters and we talked a little bit
about this and I think I don't know what
the process is for us to do this but it
seems like we could quickly dissolve
into some bit of dysfunction unless we
put a little structure and order in it
so what we'd really like to do is go
through each chapter and and have first
questions on those specific questions
about that information and then once we
get through those questions and we could
have some general discussion about it
and we just look and then we'll just
progress through so we can make sure
that we get all the questions answered
first and then be able to have have some
discussion about what people think about
how does that make sense
sure okay so I'm just going to give you
some of the dates and context of what
we're doing how this is process has been
going so about a year ago we did an
evaluation of central Issaquah and
architectural character and certain
urban design issues were raised as
concerns coming out of our first three
years the council approved a moratorium
on September 6 including architectural
fit and urban design as two of the six
work plan items staff proactively
combined them into one consultant team
was hired in March that was Crandall or
and Allah and they we've had three
meetings with the development commission
on that the April 5th and May 3rd
meeting
or with krandall or Ram Beulah with an
assessment and introduction and then a
presentation of the design manual
components and on June 8th we discussed
the outline and styles and images about
the styles so our schedule for going
through this draft design manual with
Commission is chapters 1 & 2 tonight
chapter 3 next week and then the
following week as parking lot issues or
if you go really fast you get a free
night and turn to so-and-so I think
similar to what you're describing we
want to make sure we talk about global
things and then we can go through page
by page I really do want to emphasize
that we would like edits grammar typos
punctuation wordsmithing
not to do that tonight to either give me
a written if you have marked up your
written copy that's fine or if you want
to email it but if I think if we talk at
that level we will be here till next
year and then this is the schedule in
case you're interested next week is a
council work session we just got a few
minutes ago I saw in my email that the
chapter 3 has arrived so you'll get that
electronically tomorrow and then it'll
be mailed out so I assume you'll get it
on Friday or Saturday the council is
going to get the same chapters that
you've gotten for their work session
next week where Crandall Aram Beulah
will be talking about the structure of
the document the approach sort of
catching them up with where they are the
last time the council had a presentation
was that introduction and initial
assessment so unless they've been
watching your meetings they haven't had
a chance to hear about that after we
finish our meetings with you we will be
working with Crandall Randall on the
preparation of the final draft design
manual goes to PPC land and shore and
then council adoption is proposed for
mid-october
I was just speaking with some of the
commissioners we are thinking that
towards the end of this process or
possibly at the PPC hearing either PPC
would come to your final meeting or and
or some of you might go to the PPC
hearing just to provide that bridge we
know that they've always found it real
they've really appreciated understanding
the kinds of observations and effort
that you guys have explaining why you've
recommended what you've recommended so
we can talk about that as we go I think
these first two meetings we will just
focus on getting through the text and
then we can talk about what might be
helpful with that third meeting so
that's that's the end of our
introduction I have just so you know we
have a word version of the document so
if I need to be typing in actual things
the way we sometimes do here with
motions we can actually be tight typing
in text or we can pull it up to follow
along on-screen whatever you guys find
useful
so it's following your recommendation
chapter one if you have questions I will
do my best to answer them yes I do have
a question on page on page one in the
paragraph that says visual examples it
refers to the design Commission right
here like oh sorry
uh yeah page one and the paragraph
headed visual examples it says they are
intended to provide designers developers
and the design Commission you means yeah
we'll fix it is that that's not we have
no new commission plant that would be us
I think okay we were naming you okay
other questions
yes my chairman Lucy on the P PPC are
they having a continuous meeting on this
document are they reviewing or are we
doing the bulk of it you're doing the
bulk of it really okay well they're
their job is to is more of sort of
procedural piece but we the reason that
we've involved the Development
Commission is because of your knowledge
and your experience actually reviewing
permits and PPC would not be in a
position to do that so it's a required
PPC is a required part of the process
and I don't want to diminish their
effort but I think the bulk of the
reason we've involved you so much is
that we think really you guys are the
experts and provide a good testing board
for what kind of tool you think is
necessary so in the meeting with the PCC
you PPC is it an update to them on what
we have done so far in the document then
that's end of next month it's a public
hearing I went well the meeting with
people is ray my recommendation is until
we get through this I don't know that
what we're going to how best to
coordinate between the two so I think as
we get to the end of the second meeting
next week we probably will be in a
better position to talk about how best
to transition between the two
commissions would that work yeah because
I as I said to some of the other
commissioners we're kind of making this
up as we go along this is a unique
process and a tool that the city hasn't
developed before and so I think we're
kind of feeling our way through it
and I understand your questions I just
don't have answers at this point okay
all right Thank You mr. chair yes
question so and you just mentioned that
that were it's a new tool that's being
created and so I'm looking at page 17 of
75 in our packet
numbers and I as I was reading through
this the role of the design manual
segment section here trying to
understand the relationship between this
and the codes and the standards that are
applied because if you go down to says
the guidelines are in this manual are
prescriptive and not discretionary so
generally in code world just
prescriptive means it's a fairly
black-and-white application this is what
you do and way that this is drafted is
very discretionary in nature it's more
of a design guidelines as as it's kind
of written and so it was a little bit
confused and then I went down to the
paragraph below that and it says in
cases where the guidelines described in
the document contradict previously
adopted regulations in the central is a
Clark addiction design manual the the
design manual takes precedent so it says
this takes precedent over the code and
so I started to go okay that it's a
little challenging I think from a design
and just even from an enforcement
standpoint so I'm trying to figure out
how these layer from just an application
company so you're talking about the tool
and kind of massaging that might be
something won't think about so here one
thing I didn't mention is we sent them
on these two chapters probably 11 pages
of comments okay okay so that was that
was number one from all four reviewers
we just we understand that the
prescriptive versus guideline question
is likewise with us they have made I'll
be frank it's been really busy and I
haven't gone through to see which of our
things that we commented on they've
already folded in and which ones will
come with that final draft this is
clearly one of them because we have
exactly the same questions less about
less about this taking precedent over
central Issaquah standards because I
think our plan is that next year we
would we thought we would do it
simultaneously everything's moving too
fast we need to get this settled into
being the tool that we believe it should
be
then next year we would go back and I
think look at central is squat and
figure out what parts of for instance
chapter 14 on buildings would need to be
removed because this has taken that
place but certainly the prescriptive
piece and how to apply apply this was a
big question of ours thanks I follow up
on that question I also mark that with a
big question mark at Hyde I I guess I
would ask Commissioner Brennan to say
again what your concern is because I
think my concern is the same but I'm not
sure so rather than really it's trying
to figure out what's the construct of
the regulations that will be applied in
central Issaquah planning area in the
hierarchy of how they how they work
together so that there's not confusion
about that in what takes precedent where
the staff has and the design
professionals have some room to create
versus this is what the code says and
this is what you need to do like
setbacks sorry folks that's what they
are you don't need to mess with those
line but when it comes to architectural
features and things like that that are
included here won't have a little bit of
room to create so that that was actually
my point and it sounds like staff is
already thinking through that well and
two I'm going to just this is the first
piece that I that I heard you say which
is what staff focused on so I'm going to
say this just to make sure that we're in
concurrence or if we have different
perspectives the central Issaquah
standards versus this document is a
question for us that's one that we feel
that we can resolve in the future by
revising the standards I think our
bigger question which I believed you
touched on Commissioner Brennan is that
this is stated to be prescriptive but a
lot of the language is not very
prescriptive it's you know it's a steep
roof but it
not saying steep is greater than X slope
or there are a lot of shoulds and there
very few shells and must so how is how
what does it mean to be prescriptive is
that as a performance standard
it says prescriptive prescriptive
standards are typically like it shall be
seven and then it's seven a performance
standard is it will be possessed Rhian
friendly and pedestrian friendly means
it does XY and Z and so the way this is
written right now is a little bit more
of a performance standard but it says
it's prescriptive so we have some of
those same questions about how they're
intending to apply this document so that
we make sure that the language achieves
the intent because right now it doesn't
seem very prescriptive yeah and I wrote
that term performance standard in here
too I mean I that's the way it feels to
me so you've got again that room -
there's some room to create it isn't
prescriptive there are only a few places
on its like those toons it will really
do we want to be that black and white
hue or not well and I think that would
be a good thing to hear from the
Commission is that the notion between
prescriptive and performance and your
thoughts about that relative I mean
you've only seen the architecture piece
so far but your thoughts about it
relative to architecture because I think
their intent is it be prescriptive based
on the conversations we've heard both
just with staff and mostly with the
Commission so understanding your
thoughts about that would certainly be
very helpful Lucy I just want to maybe
go back to the base sure when you say
they you're talking about consultant yes
okay that's number one secondly my
understanding of the reason that we're
doing this and is - is because we looked
we Issaquah looked at first three years
for the CIT and said so
okay we need to need to look at it again
and one of the things that I believe was
said in the first meeting with the
consultant with the Development
Commission was that the extant document
regarding development in the central the
central Issaquah plan was too nebulous
that it gave to gave developers too many
options and it gave the city and
specifically the Development Commission
not enough ability to say that doesn't
that's not in keeping with what the
vision was for the central Issaquah
plant so the answer to that as I
understand it is to give us a more
prescriptive approach to saying this is
it then a developer can come in or an
applicant come in and say okay I
understand what my options are if I
build here in this district or in this
district and to be pretty clear about
the fact that we're trying to get away
from having to approve something because
it's compliant with the code but it's
not really representative of Issaquah or
Northwest you know what whatever it is
so that where it would you agree with
that or if not and then no I mostly I
would agree so I would say that
intentionally the centrist across
standards were written to focus on urban
design and not architecture style not
materials and not colors I mean there
were some things in there but very few
tools there was clearly frustration in
the Community Council Commission and so
the determination was we need a tool
that addresses that and someone to come
in and help us identify what would be
the right styles the right colors
materials etc so I that part I
completely agree with I think that the
[Music]
and I'm hoping Michael chimed in given
his background he and and others as well
may I'm interested in their perspective
from the tools they use we want we want
architect we want to identify those
things that are important and values of
the community and be able to be clear
and and get those things and yet
architecture isn't usually a formula it
is a design each side and use is
different and so how do we communicate
that without creating a formula that
gives and I think this was what
Commissioner Brennan may have been
touching on is where there is some
ability to be you know respond to these
things that are unique while clearly
communicating the expectations and the
things that are important to us so the
challenge with a prescriptive code and
absolutely prescriptive code is there's
no wiggle room there's no and and and
that may be and I'm not trying I am NOT
saying we should not do that I think
we're just trying to understand the pros
and the cons and if we want to try a
very prescriptive code we could
absolutely do that um Lucy perhaps part
of our discussion in this chapter could
be after the questions could be our
discussion of where that we think it
should be prescriptive versus
performance standards that's that were
that way a lot other questions
I had one on urban core in the last
meeting I think we discussed the use of
the traditional
Issaquah styles in urban core and we had
three options that we were discussing at
that time not to allow traditional
styles at all in urban courts and this
is primarily in Chapter two but it's
referred to beginning in Chapter one and
not to use them at all was one option
and to have them on the borderline
permit them inside the urban core zone
was another option and to allow
traditional urban Styles across the
urban core was the third option I think
most of us discussed number two and
three favored those maybe with a slight
emphasis on three but I noticed that
this document beginning in the first
chapter really does restrict urban core
to one style and that's Northwest
contemporary so my question was did we
want to rethink our discussion regarding
using traditional styles inside the
urban core in the light of this draft of
the document so the thing that I would
add is that we did discuss this with
Crandall Randall ax and they did not
have a concern with that so I think I I
don't know whether they did not have
time to incorporate it but it's a I
don't think any of us have a concern
with it and they were going to propose a
way a method for doing it and so maybe
the question to come back to them is
that we would like to know that during
this review process what method they
proposed okay so it's not specifically a
chapter one question we can when they
get into chapter 2 there will probably
be more about this but I for one am
willing to rethink my vote on that after
I've seen how they developed the urban
core styles you know
not necessarily sure that I could see a
Arts and Crafts style next to a
Northwest contemporary so we'll table
that's right now other questions about
specific aspects of the document
definite chapter one up the oil just
chapter one okay I more uh there was
there we did receive a comment late
today I believe from Mary Lynch and she
just one of the questions was a
regarding definition to drew a list of
definitions and we don't just throw
definitions of something in here that's
not used as a term in the document but
if there are things that are useful from
just this list that she submitted there
are terms that are using the document
that would be helpful they have been
defined if they're not already defined
that might be a worthwhile exercise just
to go true and sickly
right there are a couple of things about
definitions that I would add there are
some definitions in the Crandall Aram
Beulah document that are also in
centralist clause definition chapter we
asked them to remove those I think their
inclination was to make it a more user
friendly document to just match the
definition the challenge with that of
course is remembering that it's in two
places if you update the definition so
you know we need to work through that we
also had staff had identified a long
list of definitions we wanted added
because there are a lot of terms in here
that aren't defined in in other city
documents and they added a significant
amount but I'm not sure they were had
time to incorporate all of them and I
completely agree that looking at Mary
Lynch's definitions makes complete sense
if there are good definitions in there
that address some of the things that
we've identified I think that's great
and if there are definitions elsewhere
in the city's code that would be
applicable here but they're not restated
here making a note that you know
please refer to chapter basic ROM Oh yep
that's a great idea
notice in the glossary section there are
a few that are out of order so don't
know if you want to take them here as
typos we can do that easily later typos
please suggestions for terms to include
sure okay I want to consider sip
since CI DDS is included mullion and
muntin I have no idea what they are so
our architects can help with this I'm
sure
kind of balance okay another question
alright let's let's
I think that on the table is the the
real discussion of how prescriptive we
want this to be but what's the sense of
the Commission on on there what whether
they see it as being you know as the
contractor once said whether they were
aspirational or too prescriptive you
know what is the general sense of the
Commission how prescriptive v1
my question the document does say
currently that if there's a discrepancy
between this and plans and ordinances
including I guess municipal code that
this document is going to rule right but
we that's already been discussed right
there that the city staff pointed that
out that correct did I miss that
right no I mean that it that is the way
that documents written I i-i'll just
answer your question that I think it
needs to be tighter I think no no wait
does it doesn't need to be tighter than
it is but I think that it is absolutely
in the right direction and will result
in us being able to do a better job both
in the long run in the general sense and
in our own walking out of the room after
we have to consider an application so I
very much appreciate the theory and the
direction of what we're seeing so far do
you think it should be prescriptive yes
to me that's why that's why we're having
this discussion that's why the
moratorium is put in place so we could
say wait a minute let's look at let's
look at what what have we learned from
the first three years and what do we
need to do as a result of that so I I
remember the consultant specifically
talking about how our default position
usually was well it's in the color even
though it wasn't necessarily anything
that would thought about we get a bright
blue building in the middle of town and
as opposed to being prescriptive and
saying here's what we want you know so I
think and it clearly he was of the mind
that it should be very prescriptive and
I know this is absolutely anecdotal but
when I've been talking a great deal
about this process with with folks I
have yet to encounter anybody that says
oh why are you doing that that's a waste
of time everything I've heard and public
barbecue feedback has been volved cool
that's good I didn't know you guys were
doing that you guys been the city is
part of the idea that if a developer
complies with the criteria they're
defined here that that proposal will
probably be almost automatic
where as proposals that don't comply are
subject to much more scrutiny public
hearing documentation justification and
so on I think what it means is before
somebody comes in with a proposal they
look at what the expectations are and
they don't propose anything that's
really radically different than what is
recommended so that that that would
eliminate frustration on their part
because they would they wouldn't design
something really fancy that didn't fit
at all and it would eliminate some
problems with us of not having an idea
what was going to come and seeing
something that we were pretty probably
going to be pretty comfortable with that
I would agree with that
yeah because you know that that would
save the designer a lot of heartaches
you know coming in with a submit oh what
is it that you're looking for dates um
is something and the city folks review
it yeah you know it's within on the code
it doesn't say they can't do it so your
hands are tied in a way it comes to the
design Commission
you know our hands are tied to so we
ended up with a blue building that
everybody's complaining about all did
that get through and now so I think this
this really clarifies that so we can
make it more more stringent maybe not in
agreement with commissioner Harrison but
make it a document that people can pick
up and say okay this is what the city of
this COIs wants you know I will design
it based on that and then we know we'll
go so if I can add two cents so I think
I mean maybe the questions a little bit
different
commissioners because I think everybody
up here would say this is mandatory you
have to comply with this the question is
is how exact is this written so right
now and I think this kind of goes to
Commissioner Brian
was saying earlier is how much latitude
are you going to give each designer or
each architect to kind of fit within the
box how small is the box and so right
now what they've drafted up is I think
they're intending it to be mandatory but
they're kind of bookending it to some
extent you know here's kind of some
examples of recommendations here's some
things are not recommended and if it's
clear enough and that's I think one of
the biggest questions for you guys is
have they painted a bright enough
picture for you guys to say okay now I
know I know
it goes here or it doesn't go there and
and that there's enough breadcrumbs for
me to get to the goal line or there's
not and if there's not then we need to
tell them they need to unpack it more
right and so that's part of the
conversation I think we need to have if
you guys are comfortable with the
philosophy that this will be mandatory
it is it's it's a rule you have to
comply with it but it's not going to say
your buildings have to be orange right
it's going to say it can be like this
but it shouldn't be like that
and is that enough direction for us or
do we need to populate it more I think
that's the biggest question yeah and and
that's a good point good and I would
agree with you but that would give the
city staff and the Commission more
negotiating tools if that's the
requirements and the architect comes in
and they do not fit that requirements
then then that's a tool that they can
use to negotiate on something else so so
part of and Lucy gave an example earlier
on on you know steep pitched roofs right
okay so I don't want to be negotiating
with an applicant on whether or not a
twelve to one as a steep pitched roof
right I mean it should if we are going
to apply if they're going to if they're
going to use terms or adjectives like
steep and wide and low I think what Lucy
and I are hoping for is that they give
us a little bit more of what they're
envisioning of what that means so that
we don't have to state you're amongst
ourselves
and say well is it's four feet wide well
defense what it is a pair of the baby
you know
and so some of it is I think just
providing a little bit more of that
quantitative piece to some of the
descriptors that they've kind of cued up
so and okay and I just want to point out
that they have begun to do that now the
roofs that there's a formula in there
that I thought was like well that's
pretty specific on page shoot it's in
the first chapter where define the
definition and in definitions roof pitch
and it gives a definition of voltage
yeah
moderate and steep right so that's an
evolution based on some of those
comments I think that we dished back to
them after the first round which was hey
you guys got to give us a little bit
more to work with right and and Kevin I
think what we don't want is to have
mandatory cookie cutter approach so I
don't think anybody is and has any
desire to have a document that ultimate
comes out of this that results in
literally a cookie cutter doesn't leave
any room for an AAS it doesn't leave any
room for a little bit of an imagination
or whatever that's not what we want but
I but that's that's why so far I really
appreciate the shape of this because I
think it does get us in the direction
that we've been talking about and it and
the Deaf if it has in the definitions if
it gives specific things like that that
take that to take the confusion about
what is wide and what is steep and
things like that that comes out of the
end the final product that's good I
think one of the examples I found on
page 52 of the document under Northwest
contemporary style for scale appropriate
is that if taller than four to five
floors that well I mean if it's taller
than four of and is it taller than five
it
it has to be one of the other things
like so to be prescriptive I think that
you know in the last meeting I I felt
more inclined I think to have this be a
very prescriptive code to come up with
very specific but then in reading
through this I got concerned about the
prescriptive nature and I started
thinking about some of the buildings we
have in Issaquah in which buildings
would and will not comply with this like
I say the library downtown could that
actually fit in one of these styles or
some of the other buildings and like a
color bright colors are not allowed
anywhere there being inappropriate in
all the different styles and I actually
think urban grains allows it as an
accent
this is intact yeah yeah but not as a
full coloring and it so it I guess I
started thinking wait a minute or we I
really have a very monotone right
central Issaquah area well if we're that
prescriptive about color right so just
to take a step back to your first point
commissioner Morgan the we did ask them
if they could add some s quoi images
that they think are compliant and we
began to suggest some buildings for them
to look at and also to include some
contemporary examples because a lot of
the is claude traditionals now again i'm
saying this because i want to know if
you agree because direction isn't
helpful if i'm if our direction is
heading someplace different but i don't
think that we were asking my impression
is that we were not hoping to have
Leavenworth's or you know things that
look like they were built a hundred
years ago I don't think we're opposed to
that if that's what someone chooses but
I think what we were what we were asking
is for some and they have some but a few
more modern examples that comply with
these various Issaquah style a
different styles under Issaquah because
a lot of them were very historical and
again we were not trying to create a
historic district it was our impression
it yeah comment about and that and I
agree with you and I guess the situation
that we're in we don't want to have a
cookie cut description of this is how
the building should be but at least we
have something a minimum low pitch roof
one to twelve anything above that is
okay that's a minimum anything above
that we encourage the architect to come
in with ideas on the vivid color I had a
thing about it vivid color is
inappropriate I agree unless it's a it's
an accent color so maybe we could say
something along that line we don't want
an orange or purple color building but
we could use it as an accent color so
something along that line and any of the
if the architect choose to use that or
designer you know then then that's okay
maybe especially for the Northwest
contemporary where it says vivid is
inappropriate that maybe we could say
except in accent colors yeah yeah and if
you could look at that's where we're
drawing a page 59 of 75 you know the
green color is inappropriate but then
the picture above it white or what it's
more vivid greener or white so you know
you have to be somewhat you don't want
vivid colors and I would agree with you
and everybody says well what is vivid
color to you may not be vivid color to
me so there seems to me that we need to
set some minimum standard that we will
accept and anything above that we'll
leave it up to the designer to have some
latitude for them to do the work so I'll
tell you a little antidote which is that
the city whenever you go to a planning
law class the city of Issaquah is always
a staffer identify as to identify
themselves because we're one of the few
communities in Washington in which we
were taken to the Supreme Court and loss
don't mean state Supreme Court and the
US Supreme Court so it is a it's really
important to us that that it be clear
and meet legal tests and one of the
important things is pictures that's why
I'm riffing on your comment commissioner
my own because pictures when you're
using words like muted and vivid and
accent and natural the pictures are
going to be essential unless we're
creating a painting palette and we have
one in Old Town and I found that really
cumbersome so I think we would like to
not do it that way at the same time we
have to provide enough clarity to the
words that we use and pictures is a
common way to do that so I think that if
white is too vivid then or if we don't
can even though it is bright it's not
vivid then we need to you know think
about how those things work so that
we're and we're clear with everyone and
we're in a good legal standing
there's also go back back to I guess
that phrase just inappropriate versus
appropriate and or so as I guess it's
truly prescriptive would it be allowed
and not allowed or required in in every
corner not allowed or tonight yeah so
just a couple on its on the question
here so one of the goals here obviously
is to create additional like you
described elusive tools and keep you
know how we can guide development to
accomplish the outcomes that are
important to the community but not be so
constraining that you know we end up
with everything looks the same so if you
don't want that and obviously because
that's not a rich in an appealing
environment to create so part of the
question for in my mind going back forth
between the question of prescriptive it
kind of very black-and-white application
versus something sort of more
performance-based is normally the
prescriptive
requirements are included in the code
they're going to set the dimensions
they're going to set the building
envelope size are going to set the
maximum floor plates of F AR and all
that sort of stuff so they're going to
set that they're going to say you can't
have visible mechanical equipment on the
roof so they're going to be very clear
in the decoding a lot of areas and
there's still some discretion some areas
but this tool is really about trying to
define the characteristics of
development outside of just the overall
kind of sides and dents and density
that's covered in other places it's
what's it going to look like and so I
think for me looking at this as a
performance standard it's about here's
what we want it to look like misery of
the examples when there were really
specific areas we want to give very
clear direction about a form or colors
or whatever it might be needed we need
to choose those and be clear about that
but this cuts both ways because one
hopefully it gives some clarity to the
development community and design
professionals but when it comes to us it
also gives us a tool to push back on
this and then okay you might think you
made it but we don't think you did so
and here's why and so we've got some
tools to say we want to shape it a
little differently than where you guys
took it and we're more tuned Navy too
different than the commute to the
community then they made me because they
may be coming from a different place
even a different part of a country doing
design here and so it's it's trying to
give clear direction there but I think
about it it's not only a tool for them
it's the tool that we're going to use to
say it's not quite where we want it to
be and we didn't have those previously
was it somebody made the comment earlier
and met the code music well yeah you're
right met the code so we couldn't push
back well this is this is I think going
to be a really important piece of that
process for us when we think we see
things that really going off the mark
and we want to push back on it so so
again I also being clear but there are
some things I think we do need to be
pretty clear in the standards of the
style selections and things like that
and where they go is something that's
been fine here pretty clearly in what
areas of a city and there's some
discussion about me
we want to talk about that but the other
elements of the the buildings that we
feel are important in the way they look
at cetera I think is really what we need
to focus on and did they hit the market
are we in the right balance place here
between being really clear on those
things versus let's let some creativity
happen if we're uncomfortable about the
colors and the degree to which they're
specified here a long time ago I think
we raised the issue of a pallet primary
colors and accent colors why did that
not work for old town is it just too few
or the two is there an idea of Pantone
ranges I know Palo Alto has a pallet
right you can look on the website you
can see 60 colors they specify for
they're highly acidic buildings and
public buildings so what a Pantone range
work I know nothing about Pantone so
maybe somebody else could you know the
name I mean that's impressive but I'm
thinking about you know in corporate
settings when you're on brand or you're
off brand and that's that's usually a
very specified palette of primary and
accent colors and so I'm curious why
that could not work in our case if it
were broad enough and if designers were
involved to try to define that you know
I think we have a significant amount of
discretion on the selection of colors I
think the code does that I think even I
think maybe this is a little too much
too broad and maybe there's some more
specificity we can give regarding accent
colors you know that are appropriated to
provide additional definition on key
building elements or something like that
but but when it talks about find one
that says colors here it's you know it
talks about colors that are consider
appropriate for kind of the surrounding
area
the palette this complementarity is a
quas natural environment and hillsides
increase I mean that's pretty for hot
state very good the idea is that that
it's going to blend it's going to look
good against the backdrop oh you're not
going to have something that's just like
this bright beacon in the middle of the
season which which page or anyone I'm
sorry I am on page 52 is that the page
number 52 or the packet 52 back at 50
it's page 52 of 75 in the packet it's
the North West large style
I think there's similar language in some
of the others if I remember so the
question of what we're trying to say is
that we don't want to have building it's
some bold bright color sitting in the
middle of what is a lot of buildings
that are more muted and blending with
our with the environment Orlando but you
would you would want to have a building
it does something that has an element
that pops out for a reason an
architectural purpose it looks good and
it's a nice accent it creates interest
so you don't want you don't want to say
no to that so how do we how do we put
language into this that's why I think I
mean old vivid colors are only allowed I
think as an accent and the grain style
is the only place I thought through the
whole document with yeah I just get very
concerned we will end up with a very
monotone palette a buildings again I'm
not voting for Atlas blue either it's I
look suggest guy doesn't it yeah well I
you know and I think the I think you
raise a good point we don't want it to
be monotone I I also have some questions
about natural I mean I think we can
think of flowers that come in every
color of the rainbow and so I I don't
know whether a
pantone range is the right thing but I I
think something that helps visually or
numerically communicate that I I think
the so I'm not asking for the Commission
to solve this problem we can work with
the consultant but I do think that the
point that you're discussing is an
important one to give clarity is our
brighter colors as an accent or on a
certain element or on doors appropriate
or not appropriate all Styles some
styles you know that I think is a great
piece of feedback to get from the
Commission then we all need to figure
out you know how do we do that with with
your maybe that statement just does it
you know something like inappropriate
except conservatively as accents I think
that I think the the consultant and the
city can figure out how to do that but
the general sense of a group is that
we're real interested in having it as
prescriptive as we can at the same time
we don't want it to be so prescriptive
that it's cookie cutter and one of the
issues that pops up is color and so
working with them and trying to figure
out how to be able to articulate that in
a way that doesn't open the door for
anything but at the same time recognize
as a concern of the Commission and I'm
sure the city of having that having a
style that's consistent with the colors
of the city i I along the same lines
when I got to page 44 seventy five there
was a section in there and I this is on
architecture so I are we we have a good
chapter one year or not out of champion
a hole it's a general thing and on that
to this without going to a specific
paragraph I got to the point I've done
that where I thought it was too
restrictive the section in question I
circled it and said just giving the
applicant enough
choices because I think we I think
that's a line that we we want to be
prescriptive not restrictive and and
prescriptive is more gives the applicant
more options a very clear options and
that's so I think that's that's what we
that's where we want to go so how do
people feel about the input on the
introduction we've got a few more more
sections to go I don't want to cut off
the discussion at the same time it's
it's starting to sound a little bit
familiar yeah so I the staff have
adequate feedback from the Commission on
chapter one absolutely yeah well I I
would recommend unless there are any
other philosophical thoughts on chapter
one that we move into chapter 2 well
just a quick one okay interested in
people's opinion on the placement of the
checklist in the front instead of in the
back as an appendix for example I guess
which is where I would expect to see
something like that what page are you in
- truthfully well that's um each 20 of
75 20 at 75 no I think I kind of like it
in a way in that it's right up front so
something like an architect picks this
up to go through it they'll know right
away right can't miss it and even though
a lot of this hasn't been defined yet
right get the sense of what's coming so
just wanted to ask that I forget where
was placed before right it's at the end
I noticed it too we want to stop attune
I hadn't seen reactions that not a bad
actually not a bad idea to push it
forward to catch your attention I mean
we using this tool when you go through
Bigley so
I think we can move ahead to chapter 2
architecture questions first question I
read I was along the last meeting but I
read that there's a lot of concern about
where the line is between where the line
is drawn between urban core and
traditional Issaquah and my comment is
that this is just questions right now
okay well if so so okay so there but if
I
Alex Trebek will take it in the form of
a question that we forgot I think the
consultant listened to the tape but we
forgot to call that out as one of the
edits so that actually when we sent the
next set of questions that was one of
ours as well that was that an intention
was that an oversight that the map
didn't get changed or was that an
intentional thought on their part that
it should not be changed and and we just
haven't had a chance to follow up on
that okay okay then the question then is
that would gilman boulevard be included
in the additional Issaquah parts of it
would or the thing so I as far as I my
memory from checking this is that if you
look at the screen the area where the
hand is is the area that is does not
match the urban core zone and so that
that area if it if her bin' core only
apply urban core style only applies to
urban core zone then this area would be
removed okay and that raises a related
question that I had last time I had
discomfort with the use of the word
district here because district has a
very specific meaning rate inside the
SIP
and its high-visibility district visions
and so on and the word district was
being used here and to refer to
architectural styles there's been some
massage the land
which I appreciate to try to clarify
that but I think there's still a
confusion about that in my mind when
it's talking about a district in terms
of architecture not the zoning districts
of the central esquel plan so I don't
know if that's a question but I have a
proposal essentially to change district
to zone and I know there's a confusion
of zoning then but yeah I think we could
talk through that as well okay
these are referred to in the manual now
as architectural districts correct and
an architectural district then would
comprise say multiple SIPP districts as
they're defined in the central listicle
plan for example if I look at urban core
here it may span a couple of CIP
districts so I was just trying to avoid
Dec and ambiguity and the term to use
the word district there so that we don't
have to qualify it every time and say
it's an architectural district versus a
sip district I think the solutions in
the first sentence where it says the
architectural districts are zones and my
go-to way on architectural zone I do
that's my proposal so I would I I would
actually be a little concerned about
that for the very reason that you
identified because we have zoning
districts my impression is that the
districts that are in the central
Issaquah plan are being renamed to
something different so that may actually
free up district for use here but I
appreciate what you're saying is that we
we want to have clear nomenclatures so
that it is easy to know when we use a
term what it is applying to because I
think it raises the natural question oh
you know if I'm in the urban core zoning
district and does the style
automatically apply you know what's the
relation of those so this is the problem
of having too many moving pieces at once
right so I would suggest maybe putting
that comment they think it's a valid one
in the parking lot for now I think the
districts are turning into neighborhoods
because I think it makes more sense it
feels better and then if that does
happen then an architectural district
that spans multiple neighborhoods makes
perfect sense
all right so we've got to figure out
some of those pieces and I think we'll
get there I think it's just a matter of
so far nobody's pushback on that comment
on the district side of things turning
them into calling them neighborhoods
instead of districts but that that
conversations midstream so I'd say we
put that comment maybe over here on the
side board for now we comment though
good point the question page 33 of 75 is
a good page for the example there's
dimensional requirements that are called
out in here or limits and what was
coming in my mind is are there are these
addressed in the elsewhere in the code
do we have limitations like this and
then are there areas where these styles
are architectural styles where we're
going to call these are allowed that
would allow you a greater or lesser I
mean were the these dementia it creates
confusion so if you say you can't be
more than five storeys this one but
you're in a zone that allows a taller
than five storey building it you could
so now if you all of a sudden said well
you can't have a building because you're
only allowed this this style of
architecture in that neighborhood or
zone or district whatever man is calling
it now we created a new constraint that
is more restrictive than with the code I
guess what I would say is I think what
that means is you can't use arts and
crafts if you're going taller than five
storey right so I think that they I'm
gonna I don't know this is something
that we created so I don't know and
that's why it has a big draft acrostic
columns but I think they just drop that
in but are part of the reason that we
created this as we needed to understand
some of those questions that you were
asking from color from length from
height trying to understand
and if we had eliminated things that we
didn't want to eliminate so I think the
point for instance is if you're going to
have a six story building then your
Northwest lodge because that's really
the only style and in turn you know the
is quad district or whatever it's called
that that allows that height so I think
what Keith is saying is true that but as
you get to the edges of certain ones
either
you know length of building height of
building a style is going to be almost
selected for you as opposed to having
the full range and getting to pick and
that was my thinking and I just what I'm
glad you feel this I didn't study this
table but that was my might concern it
was like are we forcing something right
here in inadvertently as far as specific
style or limiting building hypo that
would otherwise be allowed in parts of
India in a central Issaquah flora okay
good so I just sound like you've got a
200 we're working through that no other
question love the wood frame over base
that we see with that is that typically
a 5 on 5 over 1
yes five over one every live over two
yeah yeah so any any of those then that
our outside the urban core would have to
be worth less Lodge at that height yeah
yeah how do you like it yeah so we even
think about that hasha later with his
head welcome to mel rainier because then
you want to think about allowing point
about other styles because i'm reading a
new constraint on the developable
develop development potential of a
property Oh
I mean northwest lies isn't fit for a
lot of uses that developers would want
well you know the based on I haven't
looked at this in a little while but you
know you have lots that go up to four
storeys and you know I think we're
seeing fours and fives so the quest and
you know Northwest Lodge takes you to
six so the question is are any of these
others well yeah do we want some another
style that goes to five and northwest
contemporary permits higher heights
right but right now we're saying that's
not to be used in traditional right
and as I didn't look at the zoning
maximum heights and number of stories
but outside of central you can't the
urban core you can go over five storeys
well so um without the density bonus
yeah that's exactly then you're stuck
with Northwest long style marketing well
you're pretty much limited to either 48
or 54 feet depending if you can go to 54
if you have either ground yeah under
building parking or ground floor retail
or a lobby but otherwise you're limited
to 48 so you're probably at four stories
you know right now without going above
the base so I think that the range that
they they're talking about is is not
unreasonable but there's a there is a
height question yeah and I know you
start tipping the architecture if you
get to Heights doesn't Stan okay so okay
well it's a question
other questions yes good that's here on
page 44 of 75 what's the rationale for
the roof roof material not be a dominant
characteristic building roof you know
when you have a roof sometimes you want
the roof to stand out so are we limiting
the guy from the roof roof and roof
material I think in that particular
architecture the answer is that's their
suggestion so if you pick arts and
crafts they're saying the roof should
not be a dominant part of the
architecture last question with a
craftsman oh thank you in stock Aspen
sorry
Craftsman style you can test them style
okay so you go to a different style you
go to a different style if you wanted
say a significant roof element okay good
so thank you same-same actually this
what I was referring to earlier so same
same page inappropriate
again it has wood this you know yeah I
it seems to me that it might be limiting
and when it says no wood shingles were
shakes mm-hmm on a car on a Craftsman
style or is ending theme or slate so it
leaves you with composite shingles I I'm
kind of being I mean but yeah I mean
that's these are the conversation might
need to be I actually I had circled that
I mean not because I like the
prescriptive part but this is where to
me when I was reading through this I
thought wait a minute what's what is
wrong with giving them the option of
using shingles or shakes and a Craftsman
style poor men typically saying it's
inappropriate yeah I would say all of
the above are appropriate you know in
the inappropriate category yeah I mean I
I wouldn't I wouldn't
I don't have a problem with saying
inappropriate bright vivid so on and so
forth for craftsman but but then you get
down there to the roof material I'm
thinking no maintenance is an issue for
a
and I just I thought that was a little
bit too restrictive mm-hmm that's what
yeah and I would agree with that mr.
chair yeah the asphalt industry would
love it
Ted we're limiting ourselves to just
asphalt is there do you know what why I
could make it a question what the
specific complaint or concern is about
well we had we actually asked some
questions about shingles and shakes
because there was not consistency
throughout the document in terms of we
just didn't understand sometimes shakes
were allowed sometimes shingle wood she
knows were allowed sometimes neither
were allowed and we had a question just
to understand that better but I mean not
as specific as we didn't specifically
call out this page but just better
understand how they were thinking though
did you get it when an answer is not yet
one of the thank you
perhaps it's the pitch of the roof maybe
but it's too steep you can't use wood
shingle because you can't get up there
for maintenance that's why I didn't find
of rule that out
if they're flat you can't use them but
they're steep eating it's pretty steep
doing well but actually I
okay I'm using my cheat sheet but it is
a low it's a low craftsman they've
identified a low pitch roof so that like
I think that's a very good call that you
would not want a would a true wood
product on a on a low pitch roof thank
you so so let's focus on questions good
job more questions page 37 of 75
again inappropriate standing seam this
is also for Arts and Crafts style
standing seam or metal roofing again
yeah that's that's it
you know when I look at the picture
there when i underscore dit looked at
the picture and I thought what's exactly
wrong with a metal roof it's not a
bright color it's so either one of the
things I don't quite understand why it's
inappropriate well I you know and maybe
we're focusing a lot on roofs and and so
some more variety and or less
distinctions between roofs might be fine
I think that they may be trying to help
make distinct looks or and if we allow
all kinds of roofing everywhere and I'm
not suggesting that's what you're saying
but I think they're just trying to
create a little brighter edges between
which kinds of materials can be used
where both color or material and that's
just I don't know what standing set any
standing that one it is yeah thank you
[Applause]
more questions and thinking of the way
that a Northwest contemporary has been
defined here now with lots of images and
a real range of applications residential
to retail an office and so on and just
brainstorming I wonder if it would be
appropriate to allow this sort of style
outside of urban core I'm seeing a
Western gateway for example east east
side of Gilman I wonder if it would get
us out of the issue of having to build a
Northwest Lodge anytime you need a
five-story building in the gateway
Western gateway that was talk a little
bit about that already it's about
exploring the are we creating too many
limitations on given all of the looking
at all of the parameters that they can
build to so outside as far as question
your question is when we talked about is
it only allows for if it allows 450 460
foot building I've maximum hi going
upwards you can deal five storey
building there and now based on this
criteria the only type of a building you
can build is a fat is that what we want
and I would suggest probably not but I
don't know what how many opportunities
there are actually to build a building
that size given the properties that are
available or development and
redevelopment oh I don't know something
they need to take a closer look at well
and I think applying urban core outside
of the urban core Northwest contemporary
outside the urban core may not be the
only solution I mean I think if we're if
we have a concern related to the art
textural styles that are available for
the potential heights I think that's
something to throw back in their Court
and say can we reconsider some of these
other styles being taller is there a
different style that or certain
treatment that that upper floor needs
that's unique if you're going to have
Grange or Western Falls front or
arts-and-crafts with five or six floors
I mean I I think we don't have to solve
the problems I think we have to pose the
concerns the questions and and then ask
for some help unless we you know feel
very passionately about what the or have
a lot of clarity about what the solution
what appropriate solution there is I
have one question I feel like in my
first pass of this I came up with this
term but I can't seemed up to come come
up with it again as I don't see any
place for departures addressed anywhere
and you know that's one of the
mechanisms I think we have for wiggle
room right I think it's the discretion
of this board and Commission and
departures and I feel like we discussed
it and is it in here and I just missed
it or did I did I make that up I think
you made it up checked though so we have
but you know I think what you may be
thinking back to is you know with Vail
they brought several elevations the
Commission identified which one we
identified where that didn't comply with
certain codes and had written an
administrative adjustment of standards
now that's an odd way to go about it and
I'm luckily the applicant was happy with
that or fine with that if we're going to
have departures then I mean I think it
would be good to talk about do we want
departures when would we consider that I
mean we have to have
teria it has to be of because we have to
create predictability for an applicant
to understand and I know you know this
the what is the path how is there
certainty what is predictability for how
to get through this process so I think
the question is one do you think
departures are appropriate - if so what
would they be would they be for
everything would there be for certain
things and and talking a little bit
about the you know under what
circumstances so that we can try and
craft or tangible criteria yeah it's a
tough one
it's a tough test is it certainly tough
but I think it's it's the one the one
way we do have to address subjective
issues you know color usually being the
big one departures allowed upon
Commission review and discretion you
know I think another thing you can
always count on is designers and
architects pushing the envelope so so
there's going to be variation in wiggle
room just within what's presented to us
I feel like so so that's one way or or
do we just say you know that's that's a
zoning issue and it has nothing to do
with this this is prescriptive I don't
know how do you guys feel about that so
the administrative adjustment standards
process it exists now what I've read in
a while but what's the range of
discretion it's presented through that
either to the director or to the
Commission
so administrative well I won't go into
procedures right now but in terms of
discretion there is a list of things
that may not be adjusted so you can't
add uses that are not listed you can't
go above the height you can't go above
the impervious so there's certain things
that are excluded and then all other
things are available for adjustment and
there's a general list in Chapter one
and then of criteria and then many
of the development standards which are
the more prescriptive standards have
specific criteria so streets have a
specific set of criteria I'm blanking
parking has a specific set of criteria
the design standards tend to just rely
on the general list in Chapter one and I
mean I can pull that up if there's an
interest in in looking at that process
well I'm just thinking that if that
would be something that could be applied
to this or modified to apply to allow
for some discretion but keeping in mind
you know the way this is written it's
it's most ways written in a performance
standard it's not a black and one or a
few if thou shalt be this or no more
than that but there's already a
significant amount of discretion in
interpreting this document here this
question but it doesn't seem like
there's a lot of room outside the
general borders of the styles no yeah on
the style of the styles of style so that
could fall to the administrative
Jessamine standards to apply styles or
elements of styles outside the areas or
described it right isn't that part of
the function of the Building Commission
is to look at the style and see if it
falls under Northwest or craftsman
yes why'd you bring people from
different walks of life to decide is
that the style on that when we when we
brought the question that the Commission
had raised about you know urban core and
traditional or is claw area and can they
overlap and they started talking about
you know sort of a bit of a Chinese menu
and I said I said that's like too much
for staff to it you know that that's
going to be very difficult to administer
so I I think that we we want something
that it has a certain level of clarity
so so part of this is you know
going back to chapter one sorry mr.
chair so or maybe it's the beginning of
the chapter so one of the things that
they're proposing is two distinct
districts right and the more you guys
want to blend those I mean I think you
need to go back to does that make sense
or do you want just one district in the
whole central is a cloth I mean the
rationale for having to and and making a
distinction for the core is saying the
core should be perceptible by the rest
of the community as different than the
rest of central Issaquah and that's
that's that's a yes or no that's that we
should talk about that is that important
because if so then the standards the
architecture is one of the big ways that
you can do that make the buildings look
different in the core than they do not
in the core okay and so so that's I
think that's that the premise of this
now I think if ultimately outside the
core if the only choice is northwest
Lodge I think asking the consultants say
give me another choice so that there's
at least two because that's a choice one
is not a choice you know that's a
different conversation
I think philosophically what I need to
hear from you guys is does it make sense
to have two distinct districts and one
basically being analogous to the Corps
or the regional growth center should
that have a different architecture a
perceived architectural style than
everywhere else and that's a very I
think it's a very basic question that at
some point does that beam at a point at
some point you guys should talk through
because it it goes to a lot of what you
guys are talking about for exceptions
and deviations if if you're if you're
holding a more true line then there's I
don't know that you want as much
opportunity to say I've got this
building it's going to look really cool
but if it's maybe not going to be that
that regional growth center style that
everybody else is just done because my
buildings better no that's a good point
you know and I would agree with that
point and that would if you say just one
district or one Corps whatever the term
maybe we would eliminate the
the discussion about well why is it
drawn right here why isn't my property
part of this or that just have one
architectural design standard which is
this one and you deviate from this one
then then we need to sit down and talk
about it
so that's along the same line with what
cute is called Camille and I would agree
willing be willing to listen to warming
to one district rather than two will
allow all styles to be the same all
these Styles everywhere throughout yeah
yeah so why do we still want the core of
the core to be distinctive and and the
one thing I'll add because I'm just
looking at the district table as the
intensity and Heights are significantly
different in urban core than elsewhere
so yeah if people choose to build closer
to the maximum you're going to get all
northwest contemporary so you're going
to effectively do that so the question
is do you how much do you want the
Builder to be making that decision based
on the size of their building versus
saying this is the district and we want
that district to have these edges and
that character to two valid ways to go
yes that's a huge question
well okay that'll ah because any more
brighter so anyone bright ideas key so
if we go back to the if we go back to
the word that was used before
neighborhood it seems to me that what we
want to do or what I thought the
consensus was then was that's a good
idea because that's really what this
whole thing is about protecting and
protecting neighborhoods and allowing
growth in specific areas and specific
ways
so I I'm a little bit leery about what
getting away from that to put it mildly
so yeah
makes me a little uncomfortable that to
think about allowing allowing overlap
yeah yeah okay I mean I think we have a
sapphic two ways Randi one would be
we've got the core and then we've got
say the four or five styles yet this is
a traditional are you uncomfortable with
the core and temporary moving into the
traditional and are you uncomfortable
with traditional moving into the
contemporary I think the idea of having
the central core be distinctive in terms
of the height and the type of
architecture is preferable to having it
and the having that style morph outside
thing so you're uncomfortable with the
contemporary moving into the traditional
areas so you're advocating to zones if
you will to ticks but would you how do
you feel about the traditional styles
moving into the contentment to the core
well I I'm kind of ambivalent about that
because it seems to me that a developer
an applicant with the price of land
these days probably wouldn't wouldn't
propose that to begin with unless I mean
itit just seems to me to be not the
premium use from an applicant appointed
to do if they want because I think the
architect was there feeling have been
they didn't want traditional in the core
area if I remember the reservation right
yeah but it sounds like you be I guess
it's question would we be comfortable
allowing traditional styles in the urban
core if somebody wants to do it but
maybe maybe I've just got an incorrect
vision of the urban core because I see
the urban core is the higher buildings
in Issaquah I think that they're they
likely would be but if somebody came
along and said you know what i'd i just
want to build a really nice
or Story Northwest Lodge building right
in the middle of the urban core really
what I want to do right now we would say
no you can't do that that's not allowed
yeah to put that build in there yeah I
think that's a good idea to stick with
that to say no sorry okay I mean that to
me that's that's that's the core what
we're doing here is Danny you know a
nice building but it doesn't fit that's
just the cork and trying to get very
clear guidelines on this and I have
another question
Lucy on the unser can I back up right
and you like oh my guess the question is
for the other commissioners since its
come up too because I think it's a good
point about this yeah you know whether
we bleed things over one to the other
yeah I don't want to saw a building in
half or a lot in half I'm not I think I
got that I think we made good points I'd
like other commissioners opinions yeah I
I've been thinking a lot about this as
well and I still don't think I've fallen
on one side of the fence or the other I
think the third element of variation we
have on our side or character is time
right I think I think we're really not
going to see this take shape for maybe
20 30 years before it's highly
identifiable what we're doing here so so
I think I think that adds the variation
in character I think part of what you
hear the community wanting to preserve
is character so so I guess I always
become concerned that that urban core
will erode character and I think that
the best example I can think of just as
just as an example is the top pot donut
what would you do if that wasn't there
you know I think I might be pretty
bummed out I mean it's such an
interesting little folly in what is
otherwise pretty bland you know so so
how do you allow for that variation what
tool is there to allow for that
variation I don't know that's an example
not saying top pot donut order or atomic
or whatever that that style is is
appropriate but it's folly it's
identifiable everybody knows it it's
probably the most popular thing in that
area
in my opinion so is what I'm saying do I
have an answer to what I'm saying
probably not but but I just think that
that's that's at the core of character
that I think we're trying to preserve or
promote or define so thoughts questions
comments on that notion but I'm probably
on the side of saying that the urban
core ought to be distinctive and and so
the loss of Top Pot building wouldn't
bother nearly as much as losing the Top
Pot Doughnuts
and you can cook Donuts anywhere no so
so the reality is I think that it is it
is what we've been trying to do is in
the sense of transition from sleep
little Issaquah to a more urban
environment really is going to take 20
years but you're going to see that
transition yeah but it sounds like
you're in favor then like with Randy of
the bright line absolutely between the
district but I go back to an early
example we are having before the meeting
started of the fish hatchery what a
unique thing and I think that's an
identifiable landmark in this in this
town and so so how do you bring that
into the core I guess and maybe the
answer is you don't and that's that's
how it goes but I'm just posing the
question is is there a loss of character
potentially in that core so but you just
referred you to things that currently
exist so the idea here is is can we
create new interesting and unique
features or buildings in the city and so
I I'm - I'm in the camp of kind of
trying to create this an identifiable
city center essentially court urban core
piece I think that makes sense to me and
I think the dimensions of the they're
allowed there and Randy's point about
people are going to be pushing to
maximize their development on the
property
because property values are high think
it's going to drive a lot of ash that
being said I think there needs to be
some way where there is a unique idea
development idea to actually get
consideration so we can look at creating
a new and unique feature in the city
because we don't want the idea of
character is important we don't want
everything to be you know this kind of
vertical more edgy kind of urban and
that's all you've yet you want to have
things that are the identifiable
character of the city or something that
that's an attractive feature that people
talk about
it's the memorable elements and the some
of these buildings you know if you put a
bunch of them together it's not going to
be a memorable illness there's going to
be a lot of buildings that are much
similar in style but it's how do we do
that
so I think that's something that we need
to think about a pathway for those kind
of unique ideas that might emerge that
we that we really want to think about
sounder I will give you a preview of the
next chapter which they have you know
it's vocabularies all disappearing at
this hour
they are discouraging look at me
buildings accept civic buildings which
you know Vancouver British Columbia is
considered sort of a classic example of
background buildings except then there's
some that art background buildings you
know the law-courts
UBC there's some really fabulous and
distinctive buildings I don't mean to
derail us but I do I do think that they
are thinking that every building doesn't
need to stand out some buildings should
stand out
I think civic buildings could be a good
example if we don't have any Civic
buildings in central is
does that mean every building is a
background building and discuss if you
might I'm curious to whatever
commissioners think about the bright
line concept um urban contemporary
versus I'm willing to listen to see Lucy
they have to do this all this work how
would that what would that mean if we
work just to combine the whole the urban
core and then traditional what would
there's obviously some work that needs
to be done to it but I'm going to maybe
having one core red and the separate
ones and you know you look at the map
and you have this little chunk that's
sticking out from the urban core and I
don't understand what that is but you
get a situation here yes like an
appendix tip I think it's I don't I
think it follows the zoning line yeah
over the top there's that Western
gateway so this this area is the one
that is the question because you're
right
that you say well you're it's it's part
of the mixed use zone you're talking the
neighborhood I'm I'm looking at the
zoning map I just don't have that dr.
boom yeah so that's these like like
western gateways where it says you could
actually see Gateway on the Madalena
meet yeah so that's what's in gateway
I think the appendix is part of either
Pickering or Darcy I can't remember
which neighborhood that is well there
yeah there is a it's kind of because of
the way the Creek flows I think but but
you we would get away from this where is
the line drawn and just eliminate
discussion and it makes it easier for
the staff and for that folks reviewing
that this is the core whatever the name
is at that time so here's the standards
we need to follow well I guess the
question would but let's keep going
around them because that's one idea so
raise your favorite sounds like of
eliminating
the distinctions between the two it
would all be one just one Randy's
brought up the idea of keeping the
bright line between urban contemporary
and all the others Richard I think
you're in favor of keeping the bright
line I'm I had posed one going one way
but not the other the urban the
Northwest contemporary never finds
itself in traditional but traditional
can find its way into urban core mostly
for those those virtues I was talking
about just of how do you build character
or preserve or good Ryan I prefer to
have the distinction of the
neighborhoods between the two okay
Richard well I was just ready to change
my vote from last time and I like
traditional allowing to migrate aside
urban core I think I'm for more of a
distinction for urban core now and the
reason is the way the Northwest
contemporary has been developed in this
draft of the manual I'm seeing a lot
more things in there now than I saw
before including residential uses but
I'm not at all opposed to the exact
opposite of what Evans said be
contemporary moving outside of that
especially when I look at traditional
ethical up there in Gateway only and if
we're to achieve densities up there we
might want to allow more than one style
although I understand there might be
other approaches to that I think there
are other just other areas here in the
traditional area its iguazu - the right
where northwest contemporary could be
appropriate and some uses so I'm not
opposed northwest contemporary moving
out but exactly the opposite I guess of
Commissioner price is the architect I
should be quiet as ever clear directions
yes it is okay so here's something to
think about and this just struck me
thinking about what you're saying mr.
Sandford Northwest contemporary may be
the most comfortable for architects and
so I think one thing you risk by
allowing Northwest contemporary into the
traditional it area is it may be
the default architectural style because
it will be the most
familiar and comfortable and it is kind
of where the market is right now and so
I think if you if your goal is to have
distinction between two areas and maybe
a softer edge I wouldn't try and achieve
that by allowing the northwest
contemporary outside of that area I
agree there's a bread line are the
entrance it's a bright line yeah I'm
onion for the bright line black yes my
point was creating an opportunity for
our appropriate unique project or
architecture or civic building or
something good could apply a different
architectural standards in the core so
if that is a a sentiment of the
Commission I think one thing we could
task the consultants with is good day
maybe expand that net a little bit for
what becomes a kind of a instead of just
civic buildings because I'm not sure the
city's got the resources to build a
bunch of buildings in central Issaquah
but not even over the next 30 years but
you know could there be other prominent
buildings and and maybe we need to
figure out how we could describe those
so that they can come in and say hey we
are one of these and that's why our
architecture is going to be a kind of a
deviation off of what the standards say
and I don't know if that's possible I
don't know what that would look like but
if that's something the Commission as a
whole say yeah let's let's explore that
we can always kick that question to them
see what they come up with and when it
comes back we just may throw it against
the wall and say that we don't like it
leave it the way it is don't know and I
think I would agree with Mr Price about
allowing the bright line but allowing if
somebody wants to bring in a traditional
building into the core they want to
build a three-story building and they
can do it with the minimum far and make
it fit in a Craftsman style I I would be
okay with that the but the bigger
concern I had them in the bright line
would get back to the limitations
because all the
the map up here and our zoning map all
that purple is mixed use which you can
go up to 85 feet with I think you get
there in large part maybe with
affordable housing and some other things
and if we want to encourage affordable
housing if we want it in the purple
areas in those areas if we take that one
portion out of the urban core if those
are in these restrictions the only thing
that could go to you five feet would be
Northwest Lodge and I have a hard time
thinking we say yes we want an
affordable housing project now build it
in this Northwest lodged island so
limiting as Keith indicated there's a
lot of moving pieces around through the
moratorium so a housing strategy is part
of that and affordable housing is a big
discussion topic so I wouldn't want you
deciding architectural styles to try and
get affordable housing all right right
so know that that's my only point I
think if you if if you want to have more
variety of buildings that are available
in a district that maybe has ways to get
more height then I think that's the
question I don't want you to try and
solve before don't know exactly I was
just saying there's a kind of a side
note that yes we may be going against
one of the city's wishes if we limit
those buildings question mr. chairman do
see maybe you can answer this on the
west side of the urban quarters that
traditional Issaquah do you know the
purpose of that goal think that's
sticking up there you mean why is this
out why why do we have that as a
traditional and not just them into urban
core or something well it's that's
outward gateway and reeva and a lot of
the other projects that you've looked at
is
problems outside the urban core zoning
yeah but the properties over there are
all spoken for isn't it well not quite
all of them there's a few ones out there
but not a whole lot but to pull that out
when I not pulled that out but the
designate that as additional is a quad
all by itself out there seems so it's
different interesting being different
you don't know the purpose of that demo
well I think generally what Commissioner
Morgan said is correct that the urban
core generally follows the urban core
zone and that area is not zoned I it's
lower density lower height buildings
thank you
less intense events but those other
styles seem to fit better my particular
styles to fit better out there the
document Commons I was going to are
there other questions in the architect
in chapter 2 I actually Lucy if you
would go back to the administrative
adjustment of standards thing I because
we've been talking about how do we allow
somebody with a really good design to do
something that is not exactly in
compliance with the districting and
that's come up a couple of times and I
haven't actually have to apologize
publicly this I don't look at this a
long time no that's that's that the the
one who was up there before had a list
of things like that but it was about how
yeah there we go
when I just looked at that quickly when
it was up there it seems to me that
an AAS if you really look at that
there's almost everything is open to an
AAS if it's in the code so critical
areas except is authorized by the code
so above the sentences
no administrative adjustment may be made
for standards or requirements listed
below except as otherwise permitted by
this code and if you look at a through K
it's I the way I'm understanding the
wording there is just about everything
is can be you can ask for an AAS III
think that the wording may be misleading
so I think what that means is that in
critical areas for instance it will say
you can buffer average if you do it in
this particular way so that is might be
considered an adjustment of the
standards but it is a very prescribed
adjustment whereas an adjustment of
standards is just asking to do something
differently because you feel you can
meet the objectives a different way you
couldn't come in and say my proposal is
to build a house on a critical area
because I think I can do it in a way
that will meet the intent we would say
no we would not we wouldn't be able to
adjust that because critical areas is
listed in here okay I I understand what
you're saying I just it just seems the
the wording that declared flat
declarative sentence with followed by
how many a through K however you can get
an AAS if it's in the code it seems
almost contradictory and and that's I
think one of the one of the concerns
that I've had in these meetings is that
we routinely run into aass and I
understand it's completely legal I get
it and it's very carefully analyzed but
it just seems to me that it's a
matter of routine that we get a request
for an AAS on pervious surface or
buffers or things like that when if you
just read that first sentence it would
be very clear you know what I'm saying
if people look at that well if I did and
I I'm not I'm not sure there's an altar
I can't come up with a suggestion for
and I know where I supposed to be
wordsmithing this but that's a pretty
fundamental aspect of this is how it is
not part of over this guy I know but I
but we're talking would this not be a
mechanism for getting into the we were
doing a architecture architectural style
in a district that it's not
I think that's zoning misses time so I I
think to get back to the point that
Commissioner Brennan was identifying
this says anything that isn't in this
chapter
meaning the design manual the design
manual takes precedent over central or
squad this is what we're doing here
right so this piece of code that you're
looking at at the screen or this down
here is in the centralist law standards
if that isn't referenced in the design
manual you don't get to use these tools
so if if we wanted to and I'm not
suggesting but if there was some form of
departure or of these criteria where the
criteria you wanted to use then you
could say in the design manual we
allowed you know adjustments of these
standards for roof pitch making that up
for roof pitch using the criteria that
are in Chapter one of the centralist
quest standards
so other questions okay
I'm concerned about the time we were we
were scheduled to go till nine o'clock
we have two members of the public and
what might seem appropriate at this
point is if they wish to make comment I
would like to open up the opportunity
for the public to provide comment and
would ask you to sign in we'll give you
five minutes each my name is Connie
Marsh and I live up on squawk Mountain
[Music]
so from my community standpoint this
conversation is about how do we create
an Issaquah that we recognize and is
even better than the it cause that we
have now well excepting density when we
create a bright line with an urban
center I cannot disagree that we are
going to lose what is a qua was because
that is never what Issaquah was these
guidelines or these architectural
standards create a new sort of Issaquah
form so to my mind the question is
whether that form would fit in with what
you would see is equality would be
larger so as an extent of Issaquah so if
you are looking at an old town with
large bank buildings because we have
lots of small towns in our area that
have bigger buildings are those the
styles of buildings that we would be
expecting to get in our core that would
create that area there's no glass shown
there's none of the Bellevue East Gate
style buildings there so we need to be
very sure that we don't want to push
into the future to that look to some
extent because if we
go with this we are going to be in sort
of this old school for the rest of until
we change the code again right so I
wouldn't make exceptions because then
you never know where you're going but I
might allow for a little more variation
in styles of building as a part of the
package and so that's just a beginning
and I'm going to go through my notes
really fast because I only have five
minutes this presentation of the manual
needs a numbering system so you can
actually orient yourself and discuss it
without having to say at the bottom of
which page and what kind of page is that
and some things were lost that to me
seemed to be integral in architecture
and those are the uses of the buildings
like weather protection what does that
look like some of the buildings talked
about the glass not being opaque but
that sort of was in the central urban
section yet even though we're going to
have shopping in the outlying areas it
didn't discuss anything about sort of
the pedestrian interface with the lower
storeys of the buildings and I found
that concerning because we're going to
be using the shorter buildings in the
same same ways and the pedestrian is is
of major concern and I don't know if
that's coming into the future but it
felt like those were missing and then
there's the discussion of situational
placement which it actually calls out
pitch roll tape placement and it's like
well does the building fit here what are
the criteria for those in what might
that be do we want a lot of buildings
that look the same going cookie-cutter
cookie-cut cookie-cutter what kind of
variation would you want to see in a
particularly bird right so that you
would know where you were and I didn't
see that fleshed out enough that one you
all would be able to make a decision is
it appropriately situational when you're
looking at it and reviewing the project
because you might say well we have 16 of
those buildings and I can't stand to
look at them ever again but we have no
way to say no to that building a
discussion of the interface with
landscaping we have architectural so
genders that we can use with landscaping
again it's the pedestrian feel and the
use of the building and how your
entrances to the building all fit
together and this is just the facade
sort of a thing and that doesn't seem
like enough and I'm not sure if that's
coming later and I saw that yawn so I'll
go louder and faster the concept of
Northwest contemporary and I have a hard
time with that because I picture
Northwest contemporary like the library
building on front and sunset and we
could we could have that buildings in
traditional is across yet we are not
providing the forms for that in this
situation so and then I have some
details on I don't understand what the
varying like Lucy said articulation
means and it's not addressed in the
pictures as the example so there needs
to be some coherence between the
language and the pictures so that you
know exactly what they're talking about
because I was confused by what they
intended between the language in the
pictures colors you guys hit upon these
work so okay this is my favorite there's
lots of pictures of buildings where I
want to be a sheepherder and then going
for a pint and I'm not really sure that
it's a quiet is a sheepherding town and
so I might kick out a couple of those
building styles and get something a
little a little less in English or Irish
war so to speak and I already talked
about the oh there we go
talks about the library building I want
those in there so I don't have to get on
my horse and load my shotgun
thank you what it was a little long
oh forget to sign it describe Mary Lynch
to 60 no Northwest Oak Crest and I'll
sign in just to further say I already
commented about the lower part of the
urban core and that the community
meetings that the community really
wanted it moved up to Juniper because of
they wanted to keep the other
residential so if you look here I think
it is still included the other concern I
have as part of this is an action task
force so the central area plan we saw
Home Depot and Fred Meijer and all or
things that could go higher and have
mixed-use this is not included in the
urban core this would be traditional so
what you have over now if it is to be
redeveloped anything with Fred Myers or
Home Depot would go back not to what we
have and what we saw is that as up
against the mountain that is a good
place instead of near a major road those
are areas that could go higher and
provide Nick's use with housing and all
above it so I would say you need to
relook at some of your urban if you're
going to keep these designations you
need to look at where those boundaries
are and have them fit more closely with
what the district visions were and where
I think from those meetings what the
public said they wanted them to be and
go back and work with Tricia and all and
make sure that those are incorporated
similarly and I really do think as far
as uses you need to do top need to talk
about urban schools and other things
that are going to be located down here
so those reflect in the architectural
standards and the other thing I did kind
of allude to it is the rooftops when you
have a big building and you're going to
be looking down on your rooftops I think
we need to do a better job of having
green roofs and also protecting some of
the utilities there are on top of the
buildings from the views and view
corridors that are above them thank you
don't forget to sign it
thank you so we get paid that way
remember where we've asked questions
about thoughts in general over the
construction of the document at this
point I think there's a lot of work that
went into this and I really appreciate
the effort it really went into it we're
in a bit of a crunch here you know try
to have some tools for the folks in the
city to do their job in at the same time
for us to have some kind of a guidance
when we say yes or no to a certain
project but I think the moratorium is
this is it's in place and I think we
need to move a little bit faster on this
it's my thought on this but overall I
think we're headed to the right
direction Thank You Lucy and yourself
Keith - thank you I like to bring up
I think Mary brought up a good point
about the home depot Fred Meyer that
area because it got me to page 26 of 75
and talking back the architectural
districts or zones and at that second
paragraph right there in the middle
traditional is acquire is primarily
composed of residential neighborhoods
reflect more traditional architectural
styles and I was thinking well that's
not really true of most of that stuff
along East Lake Sammamish there and it
does make me wonder about is it again
maybe this gets back to some of these
traditional styles being too limiting as
we would then be saying we're going to
go back to the Irish pubs and the
traditional things that the building's
been built along here and an 85-foot
zone so even just that paragraph that
discussion I brought up I thought that
needed some change and it does bring up
my question about the contemporary work
somewhere else or do we need another
style that can work in an area like that
chair I am very happy with the process I
am very happy with the pace I think I
think we need to take as much time as we
need to take to get it right and I think
we're doing that as far as I'm concerned
I think the pace in the inclusion is
right on the money and it's I'm very
proud of this this process and I am also
I really like the product so process
pace and product as far as I'm concerned
we're proceeding in the right direction
to the right pace I've got another
comment fuel and I'll just keep popping
them in here so on page 29 to 75 the
urban core contemporary a couple things
at the top there the the goals encourage
consistency unity and timelessness and I
I don't know that I feel that that would
be the goal of the architectural style I
would want to have in the urban core for
everything to be consistent in uniform
and then the first line of simple
composition with vertical emphasis again
it I don't know it sounds to me like it
could be a fairly dull urban center is
what they're looking for and I know
their opinion was it it seemed to be
more they wanted the street side things
to be interesting in the buildings to be
playing I don't know that I necessarily
agree with that and I didn't see
anything in the discussion here their
description that actually talked about
North West something that made it feel
Northwest other than maybe durable
materials and I didn't see a discussion
of balconies in there
I think are important getting back to
the essential Issaquah plan and the
buildings we saw in there and the core
that show lots of balconies and then
personally I was not impressed with any
three of these buildings I wouldn't want
to see maybe the first on the bottom one
I don't know I thought that might have
been built in East Berlin or something
comment on that is that the best we want
to show as an example yeah that's not
what I would look for and how do you
stay so but that's why we're here
listening to you yeah I thought that
yeah that's not at all the second one
the second one the middle and to me
maybe sort of works but then the first
one I kind of nice like him in saying
this I think it's contemporary 1930s of
the architects out here sorry but there
will be no sheep herders
mr. chair I I would like to jump in
though and on the point about the
Western I'm sorry northern part of the
traditionalist opposed own I completely
agree with that that I have not really
understood that designation or why it's
carved out and in the traditional
Issaquah it seems to me based on what it
is now and the potential for
redevelopment that it should be urban
core so are you talking about this area
or out here right there where Fred Meyer
yeah okay and I would say either either
urban core or something different than a
different classic a different
classification but in just these
buildings yeah good so we're back to
urban core images and and you know I
guess I appreciate your concern that you
don't want okay these may not be the
right images I think the only thing I
would say about these three images is
they don't look like
okay so um if you're not consistent so
if sorry yes we're having fun but I
guess my so I get you know what is
consistent and what is variety so ha and
so I I understand your concern tonight
Anna and I think that that the important
I think from what I've gathered we would
all say we don't want something that
feels monotonous and I would say that
even if we don't like these three images
if all of these fit into Northwest
contemporary that isn't very monotonous
so that I think that is a good sign then
but we still need to get images that we
would be a of things that we think are
things that we would want to see because
by not liking some of these images that
helps elucidate maybe things that
characteristics of Northwest
contemporary we would want to
incorporate okay on that same line page
68 of 75 down at the bottom I think we
did like this image in a previous
meeting 68 is 75 sorry there on the
right yes yes that one you did like a
lot we liked that image for life
we always me of Queens New York okay I
wrote a note here I did not I do not
like the image at the top you all were
very clear about that and I hadn't
communicated that to them but that was
that there was a different townhouse
product that that image that they had
used which you had liked and I
recommended that they change it out for
this one because I remembered that was
not a fan favorite this one the top yes
okay one other page 71 of 7-5
or we like that page though just and
this is where I think just an edit sort
of if taller than four and so four to
five story floors where it talks about
appropriate that third sentence if
taller than four to five floors and
again that to me you can't give
developer that it's one of the other
okay yeah pick one
thank you sure just one other question
on page 71 of seventy five the two
middle pictures is that picture on the
left a picture of a door or a picture
window well what it says is just a
sliding glass door open and closed that
it looks like a window to me but I'm
looking at a little blurry picture on a
monitor yeah one of the left looks like
if you would walk into a desk I think
there looks pretty window ish yeah yeah
I think Olson okay they I think they're
two different pictures the other two
different I think it's a door on the
right on the left I think it's probably
a picture with them now but the
parenthesis yes one is close okay
a new question page 67 and there
northwest contemporary under description
[Music]
sloped roofs shall only be used for
residential buildings and minimal to no
over overhang or eaves I I guess I
wondered why seems to me I don't know
why we would limit prevent commercial
buildings from having a sloped roof to
them I think there a lot of I've seen
very nice sloped roofs at the tops of
buildings of what was the WaMu Center
downtown the original one or whatever
but I think it's a mechanical area but
what six storeys tall
yeah yeah but I mean it's a commercial
building it's got a sloped roof at the
top and I think it can look good and I
don't see why it has to be I can't have
a commercial with and since we're closed
page 66 for appropriate color to prevent
kind of thing we went through a couple
decades ago or traditional barn red
maybe in parentheses we can say just
specify pickling barn red I know
people may not have been here we went
when we went through the painting of
Pickering and what barn red was supposed
to be and had meetings with yeah to go
over what that was so I've heard yeah do
that again let's not do that again we
have an example the Pickering barn ready
had a question about black on the same
page appropriate neutrals black wood we
think that a stark black a pure black
would be appropriate for wall color
of pens it's on how much wall there is
if you get a lot of windows and glass
and black might work and siding trim it
out so okay so pure black is fine okay
yes
Jeff there's a there's a recent a
remodel down on Front Street where they
basically took out a nail salon and put
in an office space it's for Madison
development it's a it's black so at next
time you scroll down Front Street just
kind of take a look at it and see how it
feels I actually think it looks really
classy it's 20 feet wide though page 58
of 75 I guess we're going to get content
on that page right they just haven't
completed that yet if you get paid by
the page they just skip line in there
for extra but no actually I don't think
you're going to get any contact on that
one I'm serious I think I think that the
way they've approached it is that
there's one page for each of these
topics and I think what they're saying
is that the roof isn't going to be
visible in western false fronts so
they're not going to specify yeah that's
but I mean that that was my read of it
you too loose you paid sixty four
seventy-five on the urban grain style
for doors I thought it'd be helpful to
add rod style doors with glass that will
open up to expand the base out so I
think are you are you saying you want
that added I'd like that added is that
so help me understand what the words
like I thought that's a glass overhead
garage door Wiggles I would that cover
it right you know I just want to make
sure yeah sorry no it's okay so sliding
in four miles
I think about Paul right exactly
that's right open that roof about so
other comments general actually I
thought on page 46 of 75 is interested
me looking at these buildings on the
north west Lodge style because the the
number one and two are good and three is
inappropriate and I looked at those in
number two I'm not sure if that's like
clay lock Lodge or something but
personally now look at that and to me it
I mean it does look like a building that
would be out somewhere in a forest like
that in a very large roof to me I
thought that was a lot of roof cover to
be looking at in a building in Issaquah
and then I look at the bottom one and I
think maybe that's a more I think that
was the vertical emphasis and a couple
of things on the bottom one that they
didn't like but actually I thought that
might be a more interesting building for
or northwest Lodge style today they
agreed to go not a hundred-year-old one
we don't like the ones they pick like
and we like to own them you're not
supposed to yeah yeah yeah it takes the
other way around
kind what other people think about it
but I agree I had the same film is it
possible Lucy to ask it's to me it
seemed it would be helpful in the long
run if some of if more of the pictures
were actually Issaquah buildings I
because I think we've got some really
good examples of all of these maybe not
a lot of them but I do think we've got
examples in Issaquah of Grange style you
know of all these and it just seems to
me to be a good idea rather than showing
crescent flake you know if we had at
least one of the
pictures that was an extent structure in
Issaquah I don't know how others feel
about that but we're going to it's log
style well or in arts and crafts or you
know it particularly in contemporary
well I don't know if we can I don't know
if we have one that we want to put in
effort but if we do have it just seems
to me to be a great idea to say you know
we're looking for this is already here
this is what we're looking for in this
style well in that as condiments I think
I'd love to have the picture of the
library somewhere in here ins and it
wanted them to see where it could fit
but sure it does in these categories I
well and and and I agree it and I'll
tell you just from and I don't know
about other designers on the Commission
it was it was illuminating to me because
a lot of the examples that we use in our
guidelines are buildings we know now
staff in development services are from
lots of different places so we have lots
of pictures from different places and so
they may not be places that the
designers who are having to pick this up
and use it may know and it was
illuminating to me to pick up a document
and not know a lot of the pictures that
are in here in a bad way but just I want
to walk around the building I want to
sort of see what it feels like and how
to experience those things and it would
be nice to have some examples that you
know we can say to a designer go look at
this building as opposed to just looking
at a little even knowing where it is so
you can look at Google Street yeah and
and I would say we don't need to put an
Issaquah example as an inappropriate I'm
not suggesting that but if one of the
pictures out of the three if we could do
that would be a nice across structure
for exactly that reason I think it's
desirable okay also on page 38 of 75 on
the Arts and Crafts style talking about
color
I'm warm white gray tan olive and that
was it and maybe that I maybe that's
true of the Arts and Crafts style but it
seemed like a pretty limited color
palette to say you can be white or gray
or all over town I would agree I would
also make allowances for dark art brown
lady bad dark gray dark and dark gray
just dark yeah
in general other specific common
more comment good job and no comments
just a couple quick general comments
about progress here i think i think
we're creating a tool i think it's going
to be really useful and it's not going
to be perfect when it's done and it can
evolve as we experience have experience
with it so you going for perfection and
contemplating every what-if is probably
not productive but uh but i will say i
mean that this discussion tonight
hopefully it's been helpful to staff in
the and the consultants to continue to
refine it so it's more useful tool for
us to work along with staff are going to
be primary users of this from an
implementation standpoint on with all
the design professionals and others that
use it but it's going to be important
for us i think that's good in the other
just another comment i know this is a
huge amount of work for staff and we
have a huge pile of stuff in front of
you i appreciate that you know the
attention that you've been giving to the
comments that we've been providing and a
lot of credit and kudos to staff for
your efforts on this i appreciate that
thanks agree comment have we addressed
the i don't see here the issue with
roofing and no solar equipment that goes
onto the roof we talk about different
asphalt you know she would shingles you
can use as you can't use that but
looking ahead there's a lot of solar
power industry that's coming into play
and how is that outside incorporated in
here maybe I shouldn't just limit it to
solar power but there are other
equipment that are we allowing that to
go in there into the traditional
Issaquah area well I don't think the
intent isn't to have it but I think it's
a great question how does it fit in with
the architectural styles are there
specific recommendations or techniques
that are necessary to make those make if
you're going to be adding something like
solar how you would do it yeah so so if
I'm a developer I come in and say I have
this new building in whatever the roof
situation is I'm putting all solar
panels in there and people look at it as
well
sat on here there's no sort of animals
and you're not going to put any solar
power solar panel on there it can be
solar panels are made out of basketball
shingles well actually that's the new
solar roof so yeah well that would all
the files that be a question like it's a
good different question able to do that
and create those how quickly can we
change this just change something that
just says asphalt shingles - solar
shingles or mm-hmm I mean to say like a
long process has to go through PPC and
council yeah yeah well but is it would
that not be concurrent or congruent with
the development of the technology though
because my understanding is that that's
exactly where there are prototypes right
now that will be roofing materials of
various appearances that will be solar
panels so that as this as it as the
technology develops the city ought to be
able to go before they're planning the
PPC and say hey we want to we want to
adjust the the standards to be able to
allow an applicant to do something to
use this new technology yeah yeah along
the line you know when we start limiting
the designer to what's appropriate and
what is not you know I think we need to
remember that you don't want to tie
their hands too much it's a lot of solar
tiles they're coming in so a solar roof
tile or coming in - and you know if we
want to book ahead
something that we need to think about
final comments so if you have small
edits or things that you think about
later please feel free to email me all
right so I think it's a good time to
adjourn
Thanks thanks for your staff for did a
great job as good as I said the next I
just saw that that's come in so that'll
go out tomorrow you so you should get it
electronically tomorrow paper copy next
day or two
we're meeting next Wednesday Tuesday is
the council one and a half our work
session with other topics this is the
third topic of a three topic meaning on
on this as well so in case you're one
two nights in a row please feel free to
join us if we're not getting enough
summer school no exercise method thank
you
you