alright looks like we're on the air good
evening ladies and gentlemen I'd like to
welcome you to the public hearing on the
Gilman lofts we have a good agenda we're
gonna be approving some minutes first
and then we'll get into the public
hearing on Gilman Gilman work lofts so I
hope trusts that everybody's had a
chance to read the minutes from last
month so does anybody have a motion to
make on it
move to approve any discussion or
questions all those it improves say aye
aye opposed all right looks like they're
approved so you see I think you're up
good evening I'm Lucy slamming land
development manager and we're gonna
start with the quasi-judicial part of
the meeting as many of you know site
development permit of a certain size
triggers site development permit in this
case it's in central is caught it's a
building over a certain size or a site
over three acres so it this site is the
building is big enough to have triggered
that the I have you BDC sorry about that
DC is the decision-maker so luckily the
right people are here and the type of
decision is quasi-judicial so when it's
a quasi-judicial decision that means
that it proceedings have to be like a
court and be both fair and appear fair
we do that in two ways one is procedural
due process and the other substantive
due process for a procedural due process
it means that we follow a specific
process we send out notifications and
all the decision is made on the record
substantive due process means that we
follow adopted regulations as the
substance on which the decision is based
so I would ask that the commissioners
read through the questions up on the
screen and once you're done I'll ask you
some questions
so how many commissioners answer no to
all the questions okay great
that was all nose ex parte
communications are communications that
take place outside of the hearing and I
would ask commissioners to identify if
any ex parte communications have taken
place related to this permit yes mister
mom so after the last meeting when we
were leaving and remember the public
approached me asked question about the
version of the standards being used
which I said I thought Lucy had covered
in the meeting the course was on the
intent of the mid-block crossing in the
design standards codes and I discussed
that shortly and should not have thought
it was more of a theoretical discussion
but it was this project was still alive
and should not have discussed that I
don't believe it affects my judgment
with regard to this project but I have
to put that out there they shouldn't
have done it any other commissioners so
like mr. Morgan
Commissioner Morgan I was also
approached standing next to mr. Morgan
so yeah his summary of that conversation
I think reflects that I also do not
believe it will affect my objectivity
and ability to make a fair decision
Thank You anyone else remember the
public also approached me and asked me
what version of the standards
architecture and device and design
standards manual I had and which version
we were using and showed me a
preliminary map in a version of one of
the standards and I said we were using
the standards that were identified in
the meeting that was all anyone else
does anyone in the audience object to
the participation of the commissioners
okay thank you
let me see I have a question yeah but
what remind me if you will about what
the standard is now or the expectation
is of us regarding looking at a site not
this site but looking at a site so we
know something is coming up at this
location we're not really familiar with
lay of the land as it is so we have
talked to the city attorney he took a
different position than the previous
source that we were using so you can go
visit a site but I do think there are a
couple of things to point out one is you
can't draw any conclusions so you need
to be open-minded to other information
about the site that would be presented
and it's probably prudent to during this
quasi-judicial discussion to identify
that you visited the site and sort of
what you did while you were there and if
you were with anyone else just so that
no one can question that later on yeah
thank you
okay so so here's where we are we're
doing this a little differently than we
have in the past where we have one
presentation related to the briefing
response memo there was so much
discussion last time about the
architectural and urban design manual
how we use it had we done a you know as
thorough job as the Commission wanted
there was a lot of good comments made so
our thought is to focus on that first
and then we will have the second part of
the meeting focused on the brief the
rest of the topics in the briefing
response memo I want to note that we
realize I realized today that we have
not given you an updated version of the
overall checklist that is from the
manual so those are available at your
place and I also provided you with a
clean one so if you care to use that as
any kind of tracking device or putting
your own notations on it you can you'll
notice that
some things have red dotted boxes around
them those are the items that were
changed from the last diversion you
received at the last meeting and I have
that if we need to put it up on screen
so what we're going to do tonight I'm
going to start with going to start with
a beef brief PowerPoint presentation and
then I will I have the reason I have my
laptop up here is I have the ability to
pull up both the relevant what staff
identified is the relevant sheets and
all the markings that we already sent
out to you then I have a blank one that
we can go through as well so and I can
mark that as we go through just so that
everyone can see that as part of it now
the one piece that I didn't really we
didn't really specify as how the
Commission would like to integrate in
public comment whether you would like to
do that you know like I can do the
PowerPoint and you could take comment or
I could do the PowerPoint and we could
go through the checklist and then you
could take comment or you could wait and
take comment after Dan's done his whole
presentation the only thing is that as
we go through the checklist you know
we're going to mark it off so that might
indicate that we would need to go back
and you consider whether any of the
conditions or markings would be revised
based on public comment before we
finalize that so we're all kind of
feeling our way through the best way to
do this I don't know if you have
thoughts so reiterate the options here
so so they're going to be I have a
two-part presentation one is a
PowerPoint which is some sections from
the briefing response memo related to
the design manual then I have the actual
selected pages that staff identified as
relevant and then after that Dan is
going to present the rest of the
briefing response by mo so you could do
it after the PowerPoint
my powerpoint you could do it after the
checklist you could do it again after
Dan's or only after Dan's okay I don't
know what the other commissioners are
I'd like to see the the checklist go
through the checklist and then have
public comment okay Lucy go through the
checklist and then public comment and
then I was right so what you mean is
that was that during tan that was not my
intent but I am consumed I am totally
open I I so I can definitely go through
the checklist I mean that's an
interesting point I could go through and
sort of summarize how staff evaluated
the project then we could take public
comment and then the commissioners could
go through it then we wouldn't have to
do it again you wouldn't have to go back
and revisit it after public so that
makes sense is that the only time that
we're gonna be doing the check or what
we were doing the checklist at the end
of the whole meeting after the applicant
has spoken I mean I like the way this is
going so far but it's not clear to me
when the checklist will be done okay
so the option five-point see so I can do
my PowerPoint I could go through staffs
evaluation of the checklist we could
either take public testimony then or not
if we're not going if you're not going
to go through the checklist which III
your point is well-taken commissioner
harrison dan could do his presentation
then we could have the applicant do
their presentation for everything and
then take public comment and then go
back and fill out the checklist I like
that idea
good toys yeah I just want to make sure
we get public comment before we do
anything permanent I completely agree so
maybe the best thing to do is go through
the PowerPoint see how everybody feels
if they feel like moving in then we
could go have you go through the
checklist or the staff check
see how everybody feels and then you
know I mean we're filling it out so I'm
kind of trying to get a sense of what
the best thing to do is absolutely and I
appreciate all your input it's very
helpful and and to that point the form
that I you receive with staffs
evaluation that was just us trying to
use the documents we have I hope that
either as we're going through it or at
the end you know we can do a conclusion
because we have hired a graphic designer
now to prepare the final manual and
we've actually increased the budget for
them to prepare a form for our use so
I'm very interested in hearing your
thoughts about I'm not suggesting this
form is the right thing to use but what
it tells you about what might be the
right thing to use so that we have a
pretty holistic set of comments to give
to the graphic designer does an
applicant get to be aware of the design
review checklist early in the process so
they not only have the design access to
the design manual but they also know
that this is what is going to be a
checklist so this actually once we left
so you know we had done it once in a in
a kind of less robust way and you guys
said that wasn't enough so we went
through and did it again created this
checklist did it again based on the
drawings that you saw at the commission
okay gave it to them said okay these are
the places where we do not think you're
in compliance they turned around a set
of drawings in a day or two and then I
redid it again
based on the changes that they've made
so this has gone through a couple of
iterations so you know it is our
practice that before we issue a staff
report we give it to an applicant for
input you know they can tell us they
hate every condition that doesn't mean
we will change all the conditions but if
it's wording if it's a misunderstanding
we want to get that worked out and we
also
want to give them the opportunity to say
we disagree with you so that is a part
of the process that we went through okay
so just as so the two pieces I'm going
to focus on are really the I think it
was section three and four two and three
in the briefing response memo that are
designed manual related so the first one
was we contacted Crandall or ambulance
said help us understand how decisions
are made using this who gets to decide
what things are required I think you saw
the kind of questions so and and I
assume you've read this so I'm not going
to read the whole thing this is exactly
what was in your memo so this is no new
material just some highlights so I think
that some of the key pieces were that
they considered this a toolkit they
think of it being considered
holistically you know words and pictures
that we have an objective and everything
is kind of compared back to the
objective that the appropriate list may
incorporate one or multiple elements and
I think this is one of the pieces that
we're going to have to sort of feel our
way through because as I looked at that
the example I gave them is the one
that's on the left the arts-and-crafts
roof because it's clear that asphalt
shingles wood shingles and slate or
concrete tile you're going to pick one
of those we wouldn't want a hodgepodge
of multiple roof materials on the other
hand when you look at the doors there
sometimes they're very specific for
retail you know if you use brick so
that's pretty clear but then there are
other things where it's an you know it's
not clear at least initially it's not
clear and I guess the way I read both
their response it's it's almost like a
performance standard
that taking Northwest Lodge for example
it says a sense of grand entry and
arrival so as they pointed out if you
only did natural wood which is this one
here that wouldn't be enough to create a
sense of grand entry they're not saying
it's two from column a and three from
column B they're saying if you pick some
of these you may have to do multiples to
get to Grand Entry if you pick other
ones you know like maybe if you're doing
really you know a large door and
substantive Hardware maybe that's enough
just doing those and so this is going to
be a performance standard where we have
to then look at the elements they've
picked and compare that back to the
guide line to determine if they have met
that expectation does that make sense
okay that's great because hard so I
think the two things that the memo asked
the Commission to give us some feedback
on one both were related to massing the
first one was complex roofs so there are
a series of terms it says more complex
roof forms and then they give three
different terms of that that could
contribute to achieving that so the
changes that were made all roofs were
made steep consistent with the
definition in the adopted standard
because they actually put in pitches
second they reduced all of the pitches
to a single pitch again consistent with
the style third they changed the roof on
all the stair towers so there are no
more shed roofs they are now gable which
is again consistent with the style but
the outstanding question is doesn't meet
than the idea of complex roof forms so
there's no definition of what complexes
so I think that what the two things sort
of two big categories of sources that we
have to have
you ate that one are the phrases that
I've provided here and second is the
photos that are provided for arts and
crafts and then we it depending on your
response we will sort of decide where we
go from here thoughts okay I get I get
your I I read I hear what you're saying
so I will keep going with what's in the
memo and then we'll talk about later
sorry got lost so if the Commission
feels that the roof is not complex
enough staff proposed one option in a
sort of piecemeal what the graphic
migrate graphic skills in word and so
one thing one option was to make the
roof and the whole stair tower more
prominent to create an intersecting
Ridge which was one of the elements
that's identified and so I sort of
pieced together a higher Ridge and what
it would might look like from the front
so that and and do not if you like the
idea and you think this looks lousy
don't hold that against the idea and the
other one that was identified was
dormers so those are two tools there may
be other ones that you had identified
from the terms that's the two staff
thought the other element that came up
under massing was asymmetry and what
arts and crafts the term that's used is
a symmetrical composition in both
elevation and volume so in volume you
can sort of see the footprints here and
this wing is actually about six feet
wider than this wing and you know it's
slightly in an angle and they're offset
so overall volumetrically it's
relatively asymmetrical
but we're also talking about in
elevation and as you may remember the
two facades are there are very similar
they're symmetrical and so again no
definition of asymmetry there are photos
provided the photos have bearing levels
of asymmetry they demonstrate various
levels of asymmetry and so the question
becomes how might you make them more
asymmetrical and so one idea was to not
use and this was actually commissioned
their prices I remembered from last week
saying that you know we're using the
same windows in the same pattern in both
wings so I just mocked up something I'm
not saying that this is necessarily the
right collection of windows but that it
would make it less symmetrical and it
would also be a good reflection of the
difference in the sort of workspaces
behind that facade because if you look
at blow up this sort of end of the plan
you can see that this wing has three
workspaces this one has two and one of
them has its long dimensional across the
face so that the way it was the windows
were done sort of bolide that actual
configuration and then the last thing as
just opportunities for consideration was
some changes to material for instance
the brick that is used in both bases is
the same and so that potential you could
use somewhat different brick patterns in
each wing to just further enhance that
distinction and it would implement one
of the appropriate items for arts and
crafts which is the phrase that's down
here at the bottom decorative brick
pattern details
open up that part of the memo
so now
I'm really like on the edge of my
technology knowledge here good so I have
the blank ones on the left and I won't
go through that but I'm going to leave
this up here for now so what I have done
is as I mentioned gone through here and
evaluated it I think there's not much
that I would add relative to massing
because I think we've already talked
about compliance or lack of compliance
on a couple of items or maybe not lack
of compliance but where we wanted
Commission input which was both around
the complex room forms and asymmetry so
we had proposed some possible conditions
if that if the commissioners considered
that that needed further enhancement in
terms of scale the building from staffs
assessment complied with the elements
that were identified materials again the
materials that have been selected in
terms of brick I tried to underline some
of these just as a way of identifying
how staff thought about this brick would
lapse siding and board and batten it is
not natural board and batten but it is
board and batten
windows the sort of basic character the
scale of the windows the use of lentils
or sills whit down at the ground level
level where the brick is being applied
all of that complies
doors the residential so they complied
with many or all of the elements that
were identified except for the one
associated with residential which seemed
appropriate to staff and again the roof
material that was selected the asphalt
shingles were consistent with the
specifications and colors met the
palette where and and one of the
elements in the description is that if
you are using brick that it would be
warm tans and browns then moving into
the urban design section the map was was
labeled as you know to be refined in the
July twentieth draft and so based on the
[Music]
the element so the the elements I guess
the potential elements in the area had
not been defined some natural elements
that are present such as the ditch and
the wetland are probably not within the
right the ditch has not been identified
as a stream and the wetland was far
enough away and on the other side of the
building it didn't seem to staff that
that would then trigger compliance and
because the terms hadn't been defined it
seemed like that was premature to apply
those elements to the building
harmony buildings were expected to
harmonize and based on the terms in the
in the July 20th draft we felt that it
complied but we also
the draft that went forward for adoption
because we thought that had better
clarity than the July 20th draft we're
not suggesting mixing but we just
thought that that provided some
additional information that might be
useful for the commissioners review
block size because of the elements that
surround the property we felt that they
there was not an ability to break the
block up because we couldn't cross I 90
and we were already connecting into the
King County trail and we did not feel
that we could do other or additional
King County connections so we identified
that as in a parking structures again
most of it is under building so many of
the elements under the parking
structures were identified as not
applicable because this was more surface
parking but there were a couple and they
did comply with those enclosure again
complied primarily because it's less
four storeys unless
setbacks the building is set back we
indicated compliance partly because an
AAS had administrative adjustment of
standards had been approved as part of
the original ASDP which was really to
address that the property line is set so
far back from Gilman and it has only an
80-foot frontage that it really was not
possible to get the building within ten
feet of that property line and even if
you did it would still still feel very
far setback from Gilman
so that was staffs perspective on that
the setbacks from natural areas again
because of our previous evaluation we
felt that this did not apply
ground-floor entries for both retail and
commercial mostly complied except that
the design manual only allows doors to
face parking if they are used for
service employees or emergency and it
was not clear that this store was
restricted to those uses so we proposed
a condition to limit the use of that
door
same with the the ground-floor
commercial there were doors on either
side of this space that faced the
parking lot because they have proposed
using this area just north of this area
as they're loading it did seem
appropriate to have a service door I'm
not sure that they needed both those
service doors
a transparency from a retail perspective
complied except for the East Wing the
what the West facade of the East Wing
did not have enough windows they partly
because there was a planter bed there so
they had proposed a window that the
windows ended at the edge of the
planting bed rather than extending past
it to meet the percentage for the whole
facade commercial complied with the
transparency requirements weather
protection did not quite comply the
entries were recessed but the weather
protection standards in the centralist
quoi standards still apply in
conjunction with the design manual and
so they really needed to add weather
protection at each of the entries into
each retail space and/or the commercial
space to meet the 75% that's required in
the design manual and lastly the four
courts in four courts and courtyards
were evaluated by staff as complying
so as I understand it and please correct
me if I'm wrong we would move to Dan's
presentation on the rest of the briefing
response memo then the applicants
response and then public comment like
that okay let's do that
good job losing a participant thank you
well I at the end of the evening we'll
discuss whether we're gonna do it that
way
[Applause]
good evening commissioners and members
of the public my name is Dan Martinez
I'm an assistant planner with the
development services department the
first meeting that we had regarding this
permit was on on April 4th and we
focused largely on the presentation of
the details of the requested site
development permit today's meeting is
really intended to focus on the portions
of the briefing response memo that that
hopefully answers some of the the
concerns and questions raised at the
last meeting and this includes the the
plaza design for for both plazas as well
as how the trail would would work is a
brief summary the request is for a
four-story mixed-use building measuring
forty seven thousand forty three square
feet 2500 square feet of ground floor
retail would be provided and three
stories of individually leased workspace
lofts would be constructed second third
and fourth floor
the the first topic in the briefing
response memo relates to procedures and
how how those are being followed one of
the requests and one of the concerns
that we've heard from the public has
been that the traffic signal and
pedestrian improvements should be part
of the discussion here at the
Development Commission hearing staff
agrees that the Development Commission
must weigh the design and technical land
used to elements of a project when
they're considering making a decision
however the initial design of that
pedestrian crossing was already approved
by the City Council as part of the
development agreement on in May of 2017
in addition to that we agree that it
would be ideal to have that conversation
and to have phases one and two of that
design occur concurrently however that's
not the case the the first phase of the
project requires that of these
pedestrian and signal improvements
requires that the developer construct
the signal on addressing the north side
of Gilman only and that the Northwest
Juniper Street and Rainier Boulevard
intersection would be left as a Phase
two
and and that's something that this again
that the city would be responsible for
there was also a question raised about
whether we could implement the district
visions as part of this project the
district visions are have not been
adopted by the City Council yet they are
going to land in Shore committee
tomorrow and hopefully they'll be
referred back to the City Council for
for approval with regards to some of the
issues raised for the building design as
they pertain to the development design
standards
Lucy covered the design manual portion
these concerns are just meant to address
those items specifically within the
development and design standards there
was a concern raised that this sidewalk
here was too narrow
the the applicants team did revise that
from three feet four feet however we're
still looking to get five feet on that
on that sidewalk so we've included a new
condition that the the project plans
will be revised to accommodate a five
foot clear walkway there was also a
concern expressed about the the garage
lights being seen from Gilman Boulevard
and from PAGASA the the applicant has
made some revisions to that to screen
that lighting but in order to ensure
that that it carries through to the
construction permits we have added a
condition that garage lighting will be
reviewed with the with the or
that that screening will be reviewed
with the building permits there was also
a concern raised regarding the primary
entries which are section fourteen point
four of the central Issaquah development
design standards outlines the
requirements for those the applicant has
made some some revisions to that there
and staff believes that those revisions
adequately address the requirements of
the development and design standards
however weather protection is still an
area of concern for staff so we are
including a condition it was condition
31 which Lucy touched on in the design
manual
better screening from Pigott the the
screening requirements forest for
parking facilities are identified in
fifteen point in section fifteen point
three the applicant is providing a six
foot tall steel lattice with plants
growing up up the lattice this complies
with the development design standards so
we're not including any conditions there
[Music]
there was a request for a drawing
representing the view from the pegasi
site the the applicant has provided this
drawing here which is a street view
photograph with a simulated building and
then through block passage which Lucy
touched on in the design manual portion
I believe that so so there isn't an
opportunity for through block passage
going towards I ninety but I believe
that the concern maybe through block
passage and this area here directly
going into PAGASA at the time it would
currently it would go into their parking
lot so staff believes that that the best
time to address that is if and when
PAGASA decides to redevelop
so one of the thing one of the concerns
that had been raised was that there
needed to be more public involvement and
more stakeholder involvement in the
design of the the trail plazas and how
they would interface with the East Lake
Sammamish trail so we did hold a
stakeholder meeting bless you thank you
on Tuesday April 17th shortly after the
first development Commission hearing we
invited King County staff the Cascade
Bicycle Club neither one of them were
able to attend but they did provide some
some comments to us and the amount a
representative from the amounts to sound
Greenway trust was present
representative from the is Issaquah Alps
Trail was also present and then there
were multiple departments within the
city that were present including Public
Works engineering the parks department
development services department as well
incidentally even though the request and
the invitation was to discuss the trail
Plaza design a lot of what the focus of
the meeting turned to was the the design
of the actual trail and and how that
interfaces with with both Gilman and
with the plazas some some of the issues
or
some of the suggestions that were
identified and this was a comment by
King County was that this ditch here
would be would need to be filled in
order to comply with a da there was also
a suggestion that visual cues
and rumble strips be provided to slow
down bicyclist as they are coming from
coming down the East Lake Sammamish
trail towards Gilman this hopefully
helps avert any issues with both the
traffic on Gilman and with any
pedestrians that are located using the
plazas in front of the building a
bicycle service station was was
recommended and and what that looks like
and it would be something like this
where you have a rack to put the bicycle
on you have air and then you have tools
so the another very useful suggestion
was to pull the this trail site Plaza
back a little bit further from the
intersection and for further from the so
that wouldn't obstruct any sight lines
for trail users and lastly we we
discussed having the design of this
weather protection here matched the
design of this sort of the existing
storage building we also discussed the
design of the intersection again
recognizing that it's it's a two-phase
deal what one of the the concerns was
that we didn't want the trail itself to
feel like it just kind of ends there
you know parks and and city staff in
general really want to ensure that that
East Lake Sammamish trail continues to
Juniper and to to Rainier so we've
discussed visual cues and signage that
would encourage trail
users to continue on their journey so so
the result of that meeting has has been
incorporated into the applicants newest
drawings we have the there we go the
bicycle service station here along with
some bicycle racks the seating would now
be a curved bench and this trellis
instead of being three separate ones it
would be one larger trellis Tim and and
the top would be designed again to to
match that of the existing storage
building the ten-foot wide race
crosswalk has also been added by the
applicant in this section here and that
would include colored concrete
and the the the concrete here would also
be designed to be distinctive one kind
of curveball that was thrown at us was
that we initially met with King County
Park staff to discuss the that access
easement so the ability to both use that
easement to construct the signal and to
construct the trail side plaza because
that would be built on county land King
County later identified that unless the
city I entered into agreement with them
for maintenance of the trail plaza that
they wouldn't be willing to support it
so it is a requirement of the
development agreement was for this trail
site plaza to be built so currently
we've we did meet with with the mayor
and we are meeting with King County next
week on Monday we can try to locate the
plaza in terms of options we can try to
locate it on site however this site
would be pretty constrained the plaza
itself would also be substantially
decreased we could locate the plaza in
another nearby location which means the
intent of the development agreement that
location hasn't been identified by by
staff or the applicant yet we can
potentially abandon the plaza idea
altogether or
[Applause]
or some essentially some other unknown
option in which case the we would come
back to to update the Development
Commission on on what that would look
like the the intent would be to to move
forward accepting that this is on an
unknown at this time
but that staff would be would be coming
back to update the Commission on what
the outcome of that was so the a lot of
the comments pertaining to the building
Plaza were that it felt stark or an
inviting there was also a concern about
the the community board folks not really
knowing what it was or what its purpose
was so the applicant has revised that
design to include a water fountain and
some not initially they included some
red benches as seating they've non now
gone to a more natural wood for
proceeding and the the community board
has now been changed to the bicycle
locker that we had previously discussed
so the bicycle locker would now be
located here there was there was also a
question about what other cities have
done what kind of parking has been
assigned the short answer to that the
the applicants transportation consultant
did provide memo which is included as an
exhibit but the short answer is that
both city is the City of Seattle and
Renton don't have a prescribed parking
rate for Studio lofts that they are
reviewed on a case-by-case basis and
then there was also a request for a
tabulation of what the parking
requirements and the amount of parking
being provided for this both the lofts
and the existing storage building the
parking required amounts to 65 spaces
and the parking provided amounts to 81
[Music]
the there there were concerns about the
number of bicycle parking spaces the
number of motorcycle parking spaces and
the lack of a bicycle locker in the last
metal however with the most recent sim
it'll the applicant has addressed all of
those issues the bicycle parking is
being provided in excess it the site
requires six spaces and 12 are being
provided the motorcycle parking has also
been addressed with two spaces being
provided here and the bicycle locker
again is being provided here so staff
recommends the removal of conditions 10
11 and 12
however we are recommend recommend
indicial
for the loading spaces the site requires
two but only one is being provided at
this time the applicant has expressed
that he would like to share have a
shared parking with the the storage
facility however staff hasn't been able
to analyze with what that would look
like so this condition is added in order
to ensure that that we buy off on that
again intersections safety it's been
discussed and we are going to continue
to just to discuss that as on an ongoing
basis again we're meeting with King
County on Monday in terms of light
traffic light synchronization that will
be that's expected to be synchronized
with the city's existing traffic signal
network
four trees there there was some concern
that trees should be planted on site and
not off site that cottonwood trees
should not be used and that the water
line easement should be moved to
accommodate trees
currently the the as I mentioned at our
last meeting there are some constraints
with where trees can be planted on the
site the the site was essentially
cleared as part of the ASDP that was
allowed as part of the ASDP so there is
not a lot of opportunity for retention
at this point in terms of planning on
site and or off site the development
design standards do allow for that the
applicant has indicated that no Connolly
Kahn wood trees would be used the water
line easement that is staff currently
recommends maintaining that in order to
allow the developer an option to expand
in the future the five feet of if the
water line easement were to be moved
there wouldn't be a lot of space for
tree planning along this edge here we've
saw opportunities through King County
land and through wash top right of way
to to plant trees and they have both
declined that that opportunity there are
there's it there are conditions already
as part of the staff report for stuff to
continue to work with the applicant on
providing trees on site and if not
possible then trees off site or to pay
into the city tree fund
and then lastly there were concerns
about the bus stop
currently the this red star signifies
the current bus stop which is here we
have communicated with King County and
and we'd be looking at relocating this
bus stop somewhere closer to the site
and I've put the marker here but I
believe the applicant is in a better
position to discuss where where that
would go and that is all so I'm going to
go ahead and hand it over to the
applicant
hello you me my name is Lara Barnes and
I'm with Jackson Maine architecture so
from the last development Commission
meeting on April 4th
we have been diligently working towards
providing an architectural solution to
meet the concerns presented at the
meeting the design concerns that we
heard from the commissioners and the
public at that meeting far as is as
follows both the trail connection Plaza
and the building Plaza needed more
development there was also discussion on
whether project has urban grains or arts
and crafts and we decided it's arts and
crafts but there needed to be some
adjustments to the design to make it
more arts and crafts like that included
entry arched entry ways recessed entry
ways and some more development on the
elevator stair shafts and two or three
window pairings not four and the removal
of one wood facade texture and other
design concerns discussed included the
garage lighting and what the driver
would see driving on Northwest Gilman
and more stair and elevator tower
development so the trail Plaza and on
the right here is the old design or the
design from the previous Commission
meeting and this is the proposed new
design and the stakeholder meeting was
held as Dan mentioned on April 17th and
comments and concerns were heard and
applied to the new design moving the
plaza further away from the intersection
as shown here provided more safety for
trail users as well as to act as a
reminder to the trail users or a caution
that they're entering a developed area a
bicycle pump repair station was
suggested amenity and was added and the
previous design appeared to be too
generic and
not really back to the building as much
as commissioners and public wanted so
that was redesigned and relates more
back to the design of the building
building Plaza design we added enhanced
raise crosswalk and as Dan Dan mentioned
and the new building Plaza design
provides more detail with a greater
connection on the pedestrian experience
so again this is the previous design and
this is the new design a low gravel
stream with benches and stepping stones
provides a more interactive pedestrian
experience with the water feature as
shown here curving walkways and bench
benches enhanced pavement in a larger
landscape planter as you can see here
got a bit bigger and our elements that
were used to soften this space
as for the building design and how it
relates to arts and crafts arched this
is so this is the previous South front
building facade and this is the new
presented said South facade arched
recessed entries with contrasting
lentils as shown here have been added to
the main retail and loft entries window
pairings have been adjusted so
previously there was window pairings or
groupings of four windows which was a
comment from the commissioners so it has
been removed the shake wood texture
previously shown has been removed so now
there's only two wood textures and the
design now provides a consistent roof
pitch of eight to twelve which is
considered steep per the design manual
whereas in the previous design the steep
roof was only provided at the front and
the rear elevations so you can see these
two slopes are both eight to twelve
the stair and elevator towers were also
a topic of discussion so these are the
towers that were presented previously
and these are the towers that are now
I'm being presented
they were previously shown with a Rick
would Bluegreen sighting treatment and
it was commented that that made the
towers stand out too much so they are
now shown with a cream color wood
treatment to match the building windows
have been added to the stair tower here
as requested and the roofs over the
elevator and stair towers previously
shown here was at a shallow slope and
was a shed roof and now has been
adjusted to be a gable roof and at a
steep slope we have also added a chimney
and like element to the elevator Tower
and to add to the Arts and Crafts design
styles and that's an element that is
mentioned in the manual and we believe
that these steep roofs and Gables roofs
adds complexity to the project's roof
that was previously not had and so these
past two elevator shafts in South
elevation relate back to the conditions
26 and 27
concerning massing and asymmetry and
symmetry we believe that the proposed
design has addressed concerns of
complexity of roof forms with the
addition of the two gabled roofs at the
elevator and stair towers so and then
also with condition 27 and I think it's
better seen from the elevation oops
we don't believe that the building is
symmetrical in planas lucy has agreed
with and mentioned before the shift in
plan adds a some a symmetry and an
elevation the two phases are not
symmetrical as the west wing is seven
feet wider than the east two this wing
here is seven feet wider and a brick
chimney element has been added to the
west wing and we believe that that adds
a quality of asymmetry although we don't
believe the design is symmetrical we
believe the new design has proposed
solutions for roof complexity
requirements but we are willing to work
with Dan and Lucia to make further
adjustments if the commissioners feel
that they're needed and this is an image
pulled from the design manual that I
think related back to our proposed
design
as Dan mentioned we provided a
perspective view from the piccata and
Trent entry on Northwest Gilman of the
building and just to note the proposed
building does sit a hundred feet back
from Northwest Gilman and the distance
along with existing trees limits the
view of the building from those driving
by and this here is the outline of the
roof
here we have the East facade both old
and new so that being said the siding
has been pulled down three feet on the
proposed design to limit the amount of
light that would leave the site from
garage lighting we are confident that
those driving by the site will not be
affected by the lights but we will move
forward with caution and we will
continue to work with Dan and Lucy on
meeting the lighting requirements as
noted in condition 33 so this plan is
just calling out a few of the other
conditions that Dan already went over so
condition 28 the entry here at the
retail entry facing the parking and then
condition 29 entry for commercial facing
parking we agree and those entries or
doors will be constricted to service
employee and our emergency use and as
you can see the doors here are located
next to the loading stall and um we'll
provide service and loading use and then
condition 30 um speaks to the
transparency of this face here and as
Lucy mentioned we did calculate it
calculated a bit different than she'd
had because of the raised planter but we
will abide by the percentage and add
more width to that store front and then
condition 30 to the 4 foot clear we will
also abide by that condition and push
the elevator in one additional foot to
allow for that 5-foot clearance
and this is the last one here also you
heard Lucy and Dan mention that the
entries did not comply with the weather
protection requirements in the SIDS and
we had thought that resetting the doors
three feet would provide a weather
protected entry but per the requirements
we need six feet of protection and we
acknowledge that and we will make that
change we will add with a weather
protection element at those entries and
that's all and Bob's gonna speak my name
is Bob power and I represent as costs to
do loss and I just want to say I think
we've had a very collaborative effort
with the city staff on trying to get
this project to where it is today
as a personal side note my educational
background was in architecture but I
smart enough to learn that I should
probably do something else but through
that I guess that's why we pay the
professionals and I really think Jackson
main has done a really good job here
today and I support what they've done
both on the project aesthetics as well
as how we're dealing with the trail and
the plaza and just look for your support
thank you thank you all right now we're
intend to hear from the public if
anybody wishes to speak would as they
sign in and open microphone to you
so I'm Connie Marsh I live up on squawk
and I brought a sign so I'll deal with
the sign first this side says Providence
Point now but that's irrespective so I
couldn't find black
here's i-90 it's the exit ramp
here's Gillman parcel about 300 feet the
concept of a grid as I found when I
walked with Fish and Wildlife to
understand whether it was a ditch or not
or where it started to be a ditch so I
got to walk this sort of great parallel
space that was not on Gillman Boulevard
so that you could actually walk on this
side of Gillman without having to be in
the traffic and so by starting this
project without creating this line this
mid-block crossing that will go now I 90
curves down here so you're gonna
eventually end up not having a mid-block
crossing is a darn shame because walking
along Gillman isn't pleasant and to not
allow anybody to have an an interesting
walking experience parallel to Gillman
on this side of the road is just simply
against everything that we talked about
in the central Issaquah plan small grid
walkability and not having to interface
with traffic so much so when you say you
know Picasa they can deal with figuring
out how to get through somebody else's
parcel later doesn't work for me what
you need to do is you need to
holistically plan for this grid looking
in the future for 30 years saying
eventually all these parcel will develop
and how do we allow the pedestrians to
gracefully and even sometimes with fun
go through those parcels so I entirely
disagree with the staffs position in
this situation you might be surprised by
that
now let's move on to trees we are Tree
City USA we have a tree canopy and the
entire time we were saying we could be
85 and 95 5% impervious surface in the
central Issaquah plan there is a caveat
that you know but that's never really
going to happen because we have the
landscape guidelines and we have a tree
retention code and we have a we have a
actual minimum tree density and so in
this situation you also have staff being
able to say ah you know what now we can
put it into a tree fund and we can plant
potentially off-site somewhere so this
brings me back to the frustration that
we have all experienced is when is it
feasible when is it not feasible how
much of development can you change in
order to say you know it's just not
feasible to plant trees in Tree City USA
and so me you know I'm gonna go for the
trees because I don't want to live in a
forgive me Bellevue because Bellevue
actually has a lot of trees I don't want
to live in a hard scape town everywhere
I go I want there to be an echo of our
green mountains that we can see which
brings me to the plaza which is hard
scape so why do we have so much hard
scape when we cannot find places to
plant trees very confusing to me because
it seems like you could plant trees in
places where we have hard scape which
brings me further to the points that
we're on the slide when we were
discussing that community area when some
of the comments were it isn't the
verdant sensibility that we're expecting
on the trail entrance it needs to be a
special place a place where you feel
like you have arrived and this Plaza
does not feel like a place of arrival to
me it feels like we're sticking in a
little bump because we have to and we do
have a bicycle thingy
so what to do with that because we don't
know what the county is going to allow
and you didn't have the public at the
table to say what they wanted all you
had is a couple of specialty groups so I
guess what I would do is I would ask for
a condition that this be a placeholder
that will be designed after the county
conversation has been had and I don't
even know if that's possible but it
seems foolish to create something before
you can even understand how the trail is
going to interface with the rest of of
Issaquah and I feel like there was one
other thing that made me cranky but I
probably wrote it down anyway so you
already know all this but this has
expression and hand waving so and I hope
hope it has signing in eventually well
can I use this pen you can use whatever
you want
well this david Kapler 255 southeast
Andrew Street some ways this is kind of
a learning and introduction to the
central Issaquah plan and we'll probably
hopefully have learned some things here
that can be better implemented into the
future I supported the original
development agreement on this because it
was we had had some issues there of
trying to not have to be tearing up the
streets and curbs and everything later
to put in to coming up with something we
came up with some kind of design to try
and make this five corners basically
kind of intersection work and it seems
like we're getting something there the
city's saved some money
the developers putting in a quite a bit
of money into this signal so but not
everything's perfect but we're learning
and it's getting better one of the best
improvements was a stakeholder meeting
that that did help and I think the
interaction we're seeing with the park
department especially with the planning
people is really a good step forward and
completely necessary to be successful in
the central Issaquah plan I know there
was some deal about building harmony and
was it supposed to be harmony in harmony
with the the the storage building I
didn't see it not that I wanted to be in
harmony with that building but that was
confusing to me
phase 2 basically is the Southside the
city's still working and trying to
figure out how to work in the the trail
there and Rainier and juniper streets
but at least we'll have the signals in
will have the conduit in a different you
know and hopefully in a place where
it'll work for the future changes the
city will be doing to their side of the
street sure like to see some some trees
besides cottonwoods and across the back
and seems like it would be in their
interest given the back is the i-90 to
have something green in that back area
the landscaping additional landscaping
proposed in front of the buildings is of
definite improvement and appreciated
asymmetric on the fronts not so much but
there I'm not sure but I'm not an
architect so I don't know how I would
deal with that exactly the chimney we've
got to really have bricks up there
I remember in 1964 going to West Seattle
after the earthquake and where my
grandparents lived in all the chimneys
in West Seattle fell over and that
earthquake and it was pretty exciting in
the second floor of Bellevue high school
but we didn't lose anything at the
school but I don't know it's a chimney I
don't know whatever
make sure those bricks if they're going
to be up there are well attached thank
you
so I see nobody else from the public
will disclose that public comment and
open this for discussion good questions
from the commissioners yes do have
question great yes
dan can you look at I have a survey plan
that shows the property and then I have
all the C's drawing I think into a
drawings and somehow the property line
of the survey must be wrong plan or or
the a and C drawings are on the wrong
site or something
because I look at it and we have an
existing building the storage building
and the new buildings right smack
through there
what sheet are you on ray I am on a
survey sheet and I'm looking at
comparing with see drawing see Point C
Point 1 and 8.1 so when you say survey
what do you mean I have a survey by
encompass the tax parcel boundary total
plan yeah I think that's the one that
you have there oh yeah so yeah so the
property line that you have there
yeah are you showing l-shape building is
that the storage building that's out
there now
so the this building here right that's
the building that was there a couple of
years ago before and before phase one
decided oh okay okay so when the goats
still grazed okay so all right so that's
not up to date then it's an existing
it's it's the existing context it it was
that's all it was meant to capture okay
so okay all right so the new building
it's not even shown on there all right
if you look at c1 it's very very faint
mm-hmm
the the new storage building okay that
answers the question you can't see it on
the one that Dan's pulled up yeah aside
Phegley I see you young minds on the
print it's slightly available visible
yeah
but the question that I have then is
that you know when you look at the fire
fighting engine that comes in and then
around turn around yeah there you go
is it going into the building or is it
just going around the parking lot so the
the the parking there is all under
building so it wouldn't be going through
the building but it would be going under
it gonna go under the building under the
storage building correct
is there underground parking there
because I think that's a parking there
isn't it
existing it's it's it's covered parking
so it's on the surface but the the the
building is above it okay okay so it's
level but it's covered correct
second floor done okay and and the fire
folks Fire Department looked at it they
want to fight fire from well that's not
but that's not part of this project
right but but you know done yeah but I'm
just trying to understand what you're
showing me the fire engine is gonna turn
around and then come back and then the
the fire department did look at this
correct
yeah we'll fight fire right there on the
face of the building pretty they've
already proved it I know you know so the
answer is yes a will fight fire right
next to the building I mean yeah okay
yeah okay
Commissioner Liang what I would say is
that sometimes the routes that they're
showing here are more about exiting
after they've completed the fire
fighting rather than the route that they
would take during the complication so I
think it just shows that they can turn
around inside the site now they might
choose to back out if they needed to but
they have the ability to turn around
on-site if they desire to do so
resti
when you're building on a on a drawings
81 maybe a 2 would show it's better
towards the south yeah there you go the
entrance I think it's I haven't seen the
past submittal but I think the
landscaping the water fountains probably
a good idea to have that but that's
where the unloading loading of the
passenger is going to curve you have
main entrances and you have like three
main entrances I wonder which one would
they really use if two that goes into
the retail and then one goes into the
lobby so as far as you know we'll get
into this massing of of entrances
there's no central point of entry it's
all spread out correct yeah so the again
the principle use is the lofts and the
those can be accessed through here
through the lobby entrance yeah and how
would they get there how would they get
here yeah so Gilman Boulevard is is over
here right and there is a as part of the
project the applicant would be looking
at installing a traffic signal that
would allow access from Gilman both
right in and left turns and so you can
drive using this driveway here access
parking in here okay and then you can
walk either using this sidewalk or this
sidewalk to access the entries of the
building now if you're a pedestrian or a
bicyclist you would just access the the
buildings using this
crosswalk here and the again the lobby
front door is there and then the two
retail uses I I taught you can tend to
agree with you on the pedestrian but the
folks driving you think they'll go all
the way around park the car and then
come back in through the front to go in
if they are there specifically for the
those retail uses then yes that's that's
fine and and the other thing is that we
have this building and there's only one
elevator and four Studios you got
artists that's bringing down their
crafts it's only one elevator and the
elevator comes down and how do they get
to the retail so out through the front
door and come back yet
if if somebody from the using the lofts
wanted to go to to the retail uses yes
they can use any of these doors here or
the front door and to access those
retail uses there upstairs
they are upstairs so they use the
elevator bring them down they can use
the elevator or they can use stairs I
can bet he'll be willing to bed they're
not gonna use the stairs
it's crafts that they carry there no one
so so there's an every the point is that
they come out to the lobby how did it
get to the retail using any any of the
doors here the the work lofts are
intended to be III I believe that there
may be some artists that use them but
what these really are are small offices
for start-up businesses it's really the
the hope is for this facility to be an
incubator for small businesses I just
think something needs to you the
applicant probably need to relook at
that because you know the circulation is
just not working you got to go out to
come back in and it's just so easy to
put a door in there together
to the retail so the the central is a
qua development and design standards do
require that these primary entrances be
located facing the street
so these comply with the design and
development standards and and in terms
of anybody using the second third and
fourth story lofts they yes they would
use the stairs assuming that they don't
have you know a lot of things to carry
they can use the elevator and yes they
can access the outside through any of
these doors and if they are looking to
use the retail then they would go
through the front door like anyone else
the up again just need to look I'm just
proposing that the Opticon needs to look
at the circulation in there you got four
storey and then you have only one
elevator and then you got to go through
the outside to come back in so I'll
leave it at that
will it come back to me mr. chairman
very good okay why don't ya if you have
other questions yeah I have a few more
questions on your parking there's s
there see there's n but no I suspect
sees probably I'm on a car impact about
s standard standard correct about m
motorcycle oh okay ooh yeah it would be
nice to have table
how about L loading ah okay okay
we're bloating at the main entrance
that's the only way to get in and out of
them so the primary entrances are again
at the front facing Gillman and the
loading stall is is located essentially
behind the building so they would to
access the the lofts sigh they they
could use this door here or this door
here
Commissioner Liang do you mean in terms
of how to access the parking I just
realized there's a couple more axes on
the right towards towards I 90 there
there is another so that if if someone
was loading there would still be the
ability to circulate it now that's
that's good
I don't see any mail room so there is a
I think it's not labeled it's the white
area sort of between the front door and
the electrical that's correct uh-huh
right here yeah
that's all the question that I have
right now other questions from
commissioners the Chairman I have a few
try to click through them expeditiously
here regarding the parking screening the
trellis lattice area what kind of
planning do we have going up that is
that IV do we have a seasonal issue with
that how is that going to work I'm gonna
turn this one over to the yeah I'm Greg
pursuits with Jackson main architecture
and I'm I probably can't answer that
question because we have a landscape
architect and what was submitted with
the planning's I'm not sure we can we'll
work with the city on something that'll
be evergreen I guess or the issue would
be just we're not seasonal so that we
have screening there the an is that same
screening going to be on I guess it's
the west side of the West facade there's
a little space there that faces the
storage building is that same screening
going to be used there at wall right
yeah that's a wall on that side that
one's actually directly under the
building so it became more of a law this
one's out from the building by about
okay so that that parking isn't exposed
on that side of the West building facing
the storage building it does not appear
so from the plant I'm looking at sheet
l1 if you I couldn't tell there were a
couple of them there I wasn't yeah it's
hard it's hard to know what some of the
lines are okay fine signage do we have
any information on signage I think it
was mentioned a little in the last
presentation that some detail would be
forthcoming on that I think there was a
decorative band of concrete mentioned at
one time in the plans we have any I
think signage was mentioned tonight in
terms of the stakeholder meeting trail
signage and things like that but I
wondered if we had any other detail on
signage at this time no
it would this the signage would come
after the construction of the building
and they would be required to submit
sign prints sign permit applications and
they would be required to comply with
the current sign standards at that okay
would we have an opportunity to review
that or is that a staff decision
primarily at that point sign permits are
a staff decision even you know I don't
believe they'll be requesting any
deviations from that okay well is there
another bus stop besides the one we saw
there isn't there one right in front of
you oh I always stop it maybe a little
bit closer to this than the one in front
of Gilman station
I'm going to try Google tires y'all yes
and one at the Gilman station
so there's the one we're speaking of no
here's the here's the site and and
you're correct here's another one down
here right so it kind of falls in
between those two well I think what
Metro is communicated is that they would
not add one but they would consider
relocating it which is consistent what
Dan mentioned is they want to go through
a signal before they have a stop so they
wouldn't want to since the new signal is
going to be approximately here they
wouldn't want to move the stop right in
front of the building because they
wouldn't be able to clear the cig the
intersection so but they sound like
they're willing to move it closer to the
building okay okay good
let me see okay so I think the original
design of this building we've been
through a couple of iterations with this
right we were urban Grange and our arts
and crafts and so on and I think your
original conception may have been more
consistent with the storage building in
terms of style
so we've diverged a bit from that so I
wonder what elements of harmony you see
now with the existing arts and crafts
picking up on a comment from the public
with the storage building what are they
going to be that the harmonious elements
that you see between this building and
the storage building that already exists
again bop power when we went through the
development agreement originally the
storage building would have had a much
different color palette than it has
today it was originally Reds that were
consistent the the manager of that
facility is called premier storage and
they have a they have a color palette
that they go with so the best we could
do we really couldn't modify anything
structurally on or physically on the
storage building by the time we got the
information back from the city on what
the new design guidelines were gonna be
so the so what we were able to do was
convince the the manager the operator of
this storage facility to change the
color palette of the storage building to
be more consistent with the color
palette that's now being developed as
part of the new central Squa design
standards so it's not so much what's
been done to the to the studio lofts to
integrate that back with the storage
building but what we could catch on the
storage building at the last moment to
kind of integrate the color pallet
between the two of them they
approximately the same height as well
let's do the the studio loft will be
slightly taller because of the higher
pitched roofs but the floor elevations
will be pretty consistent okay I think
just one or two more the stair tower so
on the west facade there was the chimney
that's proposed there
I was wondering how we feel about that
addition versus let's say staffs option
for the taller Tower with a prominent
intersecting Ridge on page 16 so I would
propose that maybe we discussed that as
we go through the massing and
way your different options I think
that's a great discussion point I don't
I don't I don't know that we have an
answer right now consensus that okay
fine and just quickly my last one
weather protection is going to go over
the doors what is that going to look
like it's going to be consistent is
lhara
again it's going to be consistent with
the other canopies shown I can bring it
flat like the other canopy not hard but
a bit higher up and in order to show
that lintel piece the contrasting little
that you yeah okay thanks that's all I
have mr. Harrison I have two questions
the water feature I understand is also
going to have a water fountain for dogs
is that what I heard no that was a
suggestion from I believe it was from
you know you know his dog oriented as I
am I was thinking of bikers people on
the trail and what I suggested was that
if they're gonna have a water feature
there that since there's no water
available to people using the trail
between here and Redmond as far as last
time I did it that it would be a good
thing to have a water fountain somewhere
in this Plaza complex and so what I what
I see now is that there's not gonna be a
water fountain even for dogs but there
is gonna be a pump a bicycle repair
station put in which is gonna require
infrastructure and ditches and things
like that
I mean to get you know to do it they'll
be sealed so I it's a small point if
there's not gonna be any water founder's
not community water fountain but I just
I don't
the bike repair station is okay there's
right but there's no dry utilities or
air or any service to the bike repair
station it didn't it doesn't have air so
it has a pump Oh a pump okay fine
more more need for water okay the the
remember the public did make a
suggestion to hold the design for this
until there's some clarification of the
status with King County what's what do
you think of that well I think what what
we would recommend because we don't know
what it would take to do the Trail Plaza
is that if they proceed with the Trail
Plaza that they've shown that you know
we wouldn't come back and if the I think
the building I guess what I'm saying not
very well
is that the building is separate from
the trail plaza so if they proceed I
think they could proceed with the
building and if they proceed with the
trail plaza that's shown then we
wouldn't come back to the Commission if
they proceed with a different plaza to
substitute because terms can't be
reached with King County then that's why
we proposed some of the other options
that we could identify because
Commissioner Brennan had asked us that
question we didn't have much of an
answer last time so we thought we should
think about that
and so if there is input on those other
options it would be great to get it from
the commissioners this evening and so
that helps guide staff if we are not
able to reach terms and we would come
back and have a further discussion with
the Commission okay and one observation
to follow up on a question from my
fellow commissioner is that the
illustration figure six that is the
parking structure and surface parking
parking screening from Puu gotcha
I just like to point out that desert
deciduous trees
there so if that's an example of how
effective the screening is going to be
it's gonna be effective for you know six
months of the year and not for six
months of the year I'm not sure that's a
365-day
effective I think the intent of figure
six I look to my honorable coggle
colleague here I think that the intent
of this was to show what the image would
be not to say that the trees were
necessarily performing the screening the
I think I had understood that the
Picacho screening was really from their
parking lot which that has been
specifically stated I understand that
but all right
that's that's why okay okay the
commissioners comments question other
commissioners questions thank you I've
got a couple question on Dan I'm trying
to understand page 81 or page 64 of 179
on the staff comments the calculations
of the weather protection the first
paragraph I'm trying to understand it
says Assad is 44 feet long which
requires 33 feet of weather protection
31:8 required so I'm trying to figure
out is that 31 eighths provided or this
requires 31 and 32 required yeah I think
that's exactly correct apologies but
that's why it needs a little bit more so
not too much yeah thank you and then the
the paragraph below it says facade is 32
8
and 20 feet is provided but I didn't see
how much is required to figure out down
below it says the amount provided
addresses the need anyway oh I I think
that the way thank you so this is East
Wing West facade that you're asking
right right so I think that that my
coded message here is that it starts
with complies so 20 feet is enough so 20
feet is enough gotcha
I didn't provide the number but I
understand that might have been a useful
piece of information great and then I
wonder if I'd like to look at the
materials and colors again and so I
wonder if we could pull up sheet a 3.0
and then maybe we could look at the
board at the same time and maybe even
have it if you don't mind if you can
sort of hold that for everybody to look
at at the same time but if you can pull
up a 3.0 and then I thought and then I
thought the architect could actually
explain to us each section of the
building what we're going to see if
that's okay
I'm sorry which one were you asking for
a 3.0 that yeah really it's the top the
top portions
this is good because it shows all the
different parts okay for understanding
and then we can hopefully thinking we
can visualize by looking at this and
then so the this is live from Jackson
main the base is brick which is shown on
the board that's that's the rate
essentially black okay mm-hmm is that
the same for the bike storage in the
middle okay same here
and then the sighting in the center of
the building is the Rookwood blue green
color and there's a color swatch on the
right there the green that's the color
mm-hmm and the texture is the board and
batten and then the front of the
building on both wings is a cream color
which also has a color swatch next to
the green Center one oh okay mm-hmm and
that's a lap siding and then the board
and batten oh yes okay exactly
[Music]
are there any other materials us was
that the relaxed khaki is the cream
color the metal samples on the side are
the existing storage colors that were
used that we're trying to match okay
okay and so the center color that
Senator white cream color that's there
that one is that's the facade trim
that's the terrain that's the change and
the ones that left it that is a facade
yes yes okay a dark cream the dark green
is in the center yeah yeah mm-hmm and
the glass is at the window color
yeah the storefront glass mm-hmm with
the frame with the bronze bronze
mm-hmm and then the upper right corner
is that the look of the roof however
great the right at the bottom the
crosshatch what is that
hey Dan right here this it's meant to
represent these steel lattice that's
good for me
should we tell our guess what they win
[Laughter]
thank you Dan thank you sure other
questions
so how about comments if you want to go
through the hey do you want to go
through say Lucy's portions first that
picklist or through the design questions
for the development questions you have a
preference go through the comments first
well we've got we've got two things
between Lucy's design standards and then
Dan's development standards in answers
to those right and I thought it might be
good to separate those out let's do the
design standards first Lucy's yep okay
[Applause]
so on the on the right is staffs filled
out one on the left is the blank one for
the commissioners
well I'll jump in if you want I've got
I've got two comments here and I think
it would be
I'll work backwards because the first
for me the first one would be the
asymmetrical and actually I I feel like
the design guidelines in my mind are
misleading because it talks about one of
the appropriate things is asymmetrical
but then when I look at the top picture
and I think that doesn't seem asymmetric
oh no I know it's got a little bit of a
different roof line there the roof
covers where other protection down below
are slightly different but in general
the building seems kind of symmetrical
to me middle building looks kind of
symmetrical to me I guess the bottom one
maybe is a little asymmetrical but I
guess I don't feel like there's a big
push to say the building has to be super
asymmetrical given what the photos are
and I would view this maybe as
asymmetrical being an appropriate but
not necessary so I I'm okay with the the
symmetry or the way the buildings have
been designed I think with the setback
of the front edge and the turn of them a
bit I'm okay with the buildings but I
think it's partly because I don't know
that they're great the the conflict
would for me between the photos in the
asymmetry don't meant Madison
I don't know other commissioners think I
agree I think these pictures I speak
loudly and this is what we've given them
the design from and I think they've done
a good job of matching that yeah and I
would agree that you know I I think they
they try to make it symmetrical it
symmetrical and then but then if you
look at the plan then you go into
something where it's it's a
parking lot and that's where I guess I
have a little bit of a problem but if
you you know if you say is it
symmetrical yeah I guess they tried and
they succeeded in doing that but the
whole jess of the symmetrical symmetry
is that you have two elements and then
you that's the main entry of the
building and that's what it is but if
you look at the four plans it just goes
into somewhere where it doesn't there's
just nothing in there if you look at a
2.0 it just goes into something I think
it goes into a boding parking lot
whereas the main element of the building
is to get you up to
maybe the studios up there or maybe a
retail store so to ask if it's a legal
lawyer that would ask you is that
symmetrical yes I would say it is but is
it serves the function I would say no
that's not I'm confused are you saying
that you think it that this standard
calls for symmetry as opposed to a
symmetry it's no I mean what that we're
talking about the design standards that
we're using here yeah I think it is is
what it is symmetrical at the point the
point is that the design standard calls
it for it to be a symmetrically submit
and have they accomplished that in in
any way right but yes or no but the
example example we're not talking about
the example well that the example is
pretty symmetric what we're talking
about is the design is proposed I put
the elevation back up no sure yeah yeah
but I think the oh the elevation would
help me illustrate my point if you could
leave it up if it's okay if I go ahead
so I think it does achieve a symmetry
you know these drawings this is an
elevation drawing and you don't
experience life like this you experience
life in perspective so we have a couple
things going for us these buildings are
skewed from one another creating soar
this forced perspective that they're not
planar they're shifted significantly in
space which this doesn't illustrate and
so I think those two things in addition
to the the varying widths and the
varying compositions it it's arguably
asymmetrical so I think it it qualifies
for those reasons so all this discussion
would lead us to say that it does comply
is that the drift time get gaining I
think so mm-hmm I think so I agree and I
think one more factor is the positioning
of the building against where most
people will be viewing it from it's
already set askew from the government
vole bar boulevard and unless you're
actually approaching it directly from
the front exactly I mean you wouldn't
see anything close to that perspective
it's in front of us here so I would tend
to agree I think I think it satisfies
what we're trying to accomplish with
that design intent is the chimney and
discussion fit here under massing or is
that I think I'll get to my next point
if you don't mind I think that'll come
in because if you can loose if you can
go to G 0.03
out three sorry I lost track yeah so
that was so this is I guess this is the
one where I guess I very much agree
about the complex roof forms and when I
look at the the bottom one and I look to
the roof structure to the right even
with the the dormer for the stairwell it
looks like a very long flat plain roof
from either direction looking at that
and the back side I don't think it
matters as much because I don't think
people will see a lot so adding the
chimney I think helps but this one is
really critical and to me it seems like
a very non complex roof my thought is
that we would need a lot more going on
on this roof like maybe a series of
dormers or gable dormers all along that
roof as opposed to just one and and
excuse me Commissioner Morgan and as
your concern views from I'm just not I I
do understand that as you approach the
building the front facade and a portion
of the side facade I'm not sure that
this view will ever be available I think
this view I think this is a good view
from Gilman and I like I think their
front view of this is in my mind complex
enough with the two different route
forms in the one dormer it's beyond the
dormer to the right that as that as it
goes back it's just one long I don't
know 100 foot long flat roof with no
change to it and to me doesn't seem
complex beyond that and given the when
you look at the roofs that are shown in
the pictures there's nothing that's you
know none of the roofs and the design
guidelines are are long you know 100
foot long
single roofline like that so are you
saying that we need some former or some
modulation to break I think I need that
Liza he exactly okay okay
I'm curious what other yeah and I would
agree with you and I think we also need
to remember that's the exit on the
backside on the north side that's where
the i ninety exodus and a lot of times
people it's a stop light and that's what
they see is this long big building and i
would have to say if you look at g point
zero three it's like on the top i
rendering it's like some homes that that
were put on still waving waiting for a
flood to come in or flood has come in
and so it's raced like that and plus
this big building concept it's like a
barracks it's like somebody took all of
rallies a storage unit stack them all up
and then put it up on stilts so and i
would agree that you know we need to do
something to to break up that that long
wall that long roof and have some kind
of modulation just i hate to say it it's
just kind of ugly both from Gillman
point of view and from exit exceed you
come down and you see that big building
that's cream color you were trying to
have some greeneries around here so you
have some trees plans so as you're
coming down I 92 the exit waiting for
the light that's what you see is this
cream building that's gonna stand out
and it's just one flat sidings the roof
and it's four-story high and maybe even
five because of the roof so if we could
if we can make some modulation in there
something like that and I would I would
I would really encourage the
begin to take a look at it and to answer
your question you know to get back to
this checklist that we have I would have
to say that it's it doesn't meet the
requirements any comments from other
commissioners I'm just trying to
visualize what would what would it look
like if you started modifying the roof
condition and whether that's going to be
without something to look at it's
whether that's going to be helpful to
the architecture overall architecture to
the building or more of a detractor or
too busy yeah because I and I've been
struggling with that elevation since the
first time we saw this and about you
know because it's a very long it is a
long building and meet some dimensional
requirements I think that what's be done
with kind of the prominent sods to the
building and the this was Western
elevation yes
it's grouped good I think it looks good
those modifications work the one piece
and the staff report about modifying
this particular dormer and extending it
taller and doing something that makes at
least that front in portion or front
third of the building look a little more
interesting I wonder if you keep going
back and if we do more worried that it
actually I mean not lead us down a
better design to a better design
sleepywood okay yeah which which
actually Serta gets almost to the I
think the conflict here between the arts
and crafts and the grange style because
I still think we have a green style
looking building and and I would be
afraid that we first of all I guess I I
don't I'm ambivalent about increasing
the height of the stairwell dormer I
don't know that I want to make that more
prominent so I think I would leave it
the way it is but my concern would be is
if we tell somebody the
is a complex roofline and it's a hundred
foot long straight flat not flat but
single pitch roof be hard to tell
somebody else coming in there right it
had the same and we would say no that's
not complex but yeah I would agree I
think I think we have to just go back to
the definition is it complex well it's
more complex than it was
I do appreciate what you did to the
elevator and the stair tower I think
that's a market improvement is it
complex no I think in this funny way
it's it's more simplified than it was in
the previous versions with the shed roof
so so so I think we're probably in a
struggle with a semantic battle here of
what is complexity what does that mean
and and so without more footing or
clarification on what that means it's
it's subjective but I agree with what my
other commissioners have said is is if
[Music]
if we're setting a precedent here and
and I appreciate that the applicant has
gone through this process and and been
the guinea pig so to speak but if if
this then defines complexity I think
we'll struggle in the future to have any
footing to define complexity that's what
I worry about
yeah I think you said it better but so I
luckily I think we're doing the hardest
one first so what I'm hearing is that we
that we would that number 27 which you
can see down here at the bottom which is
about asymmetrical that we would delete
that condition based on the
commissioners conversation is is there a
consensus on that yes yes
yeah mr. Harrison okay okay so okay and
so the question remains then relative to
number 26 the way that's drafted it's
identified increasing the scale of the
stair well roofs that seems like at
least for some commissioners that is not
a good solution in terms of addressing
complexity I think that are the gable or
hipped dormers matching the roof type
and then intersecting ridges so that
that was the idea behind increasing the
stair tower and I I'm not promoting
anything I'm just talking us through it
so that would really leave us for
dormers as the other choice along that
facade that eastern facade there are
certainly examples shown here and they
may be
but can I just ask Commissioner Morgan
are you saying it says here that the
roof form shall be complex so with what
we have right now once one is that an
elevator door made of sticking out then
the rest is all flat right are you
saying that you want to see that how do
you accomplish complex is what I'm
trying to come what I'm thinking is on
that long roof line mm-hmm that there
would be more dormers Oh more dorm break
that up to make it more complex as
opposed to one long can I show you a
couple more images I was just getting my
copy so I wasn't scrolling through so so
if I can just carry on that idea
dovetail into what you're thinking
instead of adding more dormer I mean we
don't want to add a whole bunch of
dormer how about one at each end well
and and then the question would be would
that be complex and that would that be
you know complex the roof form shall be
complex yeah by adding civil we in the
end you would have to one at each end I
have this roof line I think that bottom
left picture shows you a fairly lengthy
building so one thing to keep in mind
although these pictures are within the
family of Arts and Crafts
I do remember having this conversation
with Crandall Aram Billa because you
could look at this this lower picture
and say why aren't we allowing shed
roofs in different pitched roofs to
but but these pictures are shown for at
the scale page not at the massing page
right so I do think so we have to keep
that in mind when we look at these
pictures on other pages you can see this
one which has the dual pitch you know in
this area you can see there's some sort
of dormer or element that has been added
and then the last is I'm sorry so the
multiple pitches you know like they're
doing sort of a double Gable that is a
pretty common version and you can tell
that there is you know a ridge up here
that is establishing the main gable and
that these are these are I think in
essence your cross ridges that were
described but in in almost like a big
dormer so mm-hmm so I'm just trying to
identify some of the pieces of
vocabulary that are shown in our toolkit
well in North regard to roofline I take
the bottom right is the one that shows
the largest longest roofline for that
scale and they show it either ends
fairly large dormers or ridge lines and
then a couple small dormers in between
well you mean this one right here go to
the bottom right right this one yeah
sorry yeah yeah and the if you look at
the floor plan of the level four there's
a fairly large studio on on each end and
that would you know you've got a dormer
on one end and so like commissioner lyon
is talking about you could put a dormer
on the other end over the studio and
create some complexity I think that that
notion of complexity is really
subjective exactly it is we struggle
with that really in the original
description it's saying that the roof
forms are more calm
flex than craftsman it's really saying
that more complex forms distinguish it
from craftsman it's not really talking
saying that they must be ultimately
complex it's making a contrast with a
Craftsman style Lucy it's on the massing
original description on the right side
there no I know I'm trying I was trying
oh shoot that's what I was trying to do
was find the craftsman pages
okay so here's craftsman massing which
has a hipped roof but you can see that
it's a relatively although you have
these projections they're sometimes
incorporated into the overall roof lines
and or just you know a larger simpler
plane it's really busy
I don't you know this is this is more
what we're talking about I think I mean
arts and crafts and craftsman are
related to each other so if we're
supposed to be more complex than that
then we look at our birth line in well
they didn't think she knew this so do
you think it meets the sign guidelines
if we add another dormer at the end so
that we would have 2 dormers on the long
face of the building I think that would
help yeah I don't know if it'd be enough
to be complex but I think it helps you
know I just filled it you know this long
wall it's just you just need some
modulation in there and I think the
dormer would help and adding 2 dormers
one on each end would really enhance
that we're still meeting the intent of
the guidelines we're we're not adding a
whole bunch we're just adding one big
one in front and one in the back on both
sides of the building and I personally I
wouldn't be worried about the other side
of the building because it faces the
self storage unit I can't I don't think
it's really gonna be seen from a freeway
at all well if you do you treat this
building dramatically different than the
other you know we're trying to be
asymmetrical it really starts to get
unusual in the overall architecture of
the building and so concerned about that
so I care I guess just a couple of
thoughts as this conversation is going
on so I this the challenge is that this
is you know our first run it really
officially applying the new guidelines
and so we're gonna unfortunately
struggle a little bit no it's gonna slow
us down but I think it's important
choices that we're making as we as we
make these
decisions the I'm a little reluctant to
actually specify a specific roof
condition at the end like put a dormer
this and put a doormat that and because
really it's the design professionals job
to try to make the feedback and apply it
in a way that makes sense for them and
their client and so I hate to be that
prescriptive but there seems to be some
growing consensus on the Commission that
try to get an art more arts and crafts
compliant roof condition and based on
our interpretation of complexity is kind
of where it's headed
our challenge is applying these fairly
prescriptive architectural styles to
buildings that may not you know fit
really well into the because the box
isn't the right size to really apply
those features in a way that really
makes perfect a perfect fit so we're
gonna have to be somewhat flexible here
because this is a very long you look at
the example the examples of the Arts and
Crafts style and if you just I just
google images of Arts and Crafts
architecture and and this is a all of
the examples are many of them are
residential sorts of projects too but
and I think that's a good point because
200 feet is the maximum length um that's
specified in the design manual and this
is about at 200 feet so I think some of
the challenges that come with that are
evident yeah so I guess what we need to
do do is decide you know whether or not
this is something that is we're gonna
need a little more work on but we should
also if we do decide that make sure that
we have gone through the rest of the
project and decided whether or not you
know we're good with the rest or or
there's other other features and would
we be comfortable with a condition the
one that's written or something else
that'll give staff the flexibility to
approve
changes that they might do without
having to come back to the Development
Commission right so it would have to be
enough kind of specificity in the
direction that staff would have you know
confidence and what they go up with it's
gonna work but they're not gonna hear
back from us later when it's under
construction well which will be beyond
our place to weigh in but other than
comment mr. Harrison yeah well I just
feel remiss frankly because I think we
missed an opportunity to address this in
the last meeting and I personally feel
remiss because I had the same feeling
last time and I didn't express it and I
think it would have been infinitely more
productive of this commission to have
brought these issues that this issue of
last time and I am guilty as charged
I feel that it is absolutely true that
the building is asymmetrical on its
front and I it's not on the side it's
it's it's not so what do you do with
that and I would suggest that along with
Commissioner Brennan that we expressed
the sort of the concern that the
Commission has and then give it to the
applicant and the staff to address our
concerns which I think are legitimate
but I'm really reluctant to start
requiring specific things to address our
concerns proposed condition says that
roof forum shall be complex through the
use of dormers and or increasing the
scale of the stairwell roofs and to
create more visible intersecting ridges
so they've complied with some of that
but are the sense of the Commission as
best I can tell is that it's not complex
enough the other the other part of that
proposed condition was that the
composition is not asymmetrical and I
there's a fairly consistent agreement
that it is asymmetrical asymmetrical
enough yeah so one of the things again
the up for discussion but what I've done
is on your form put in a place for
comments and conditions on each page so
I've already based on and luckily this
is easy to retype if you disagree but I
just noted that we're deleting number 27
for instance so that we are able to sort
of track the decisions as you make them
not that we can't go back and revisit
those to ensure that we're getting to
the right place I would say to
Commissioner Harrison we all set a high
bar for ourselves I think last week last
meeting we you know staff did not do I I
think the Commission has done a fabulous
job of leading the way on how to really
fully implement this I think you know I
know that when I did it I mainly focused
on the front facade not the east and
west facade thinking that those weren't
going to be so visible I think you've
challenged us on that I think that's a
great thing and so I think you
challenged the staff to go back and do a
more detailed evaluation and the
applicant to respond to that based on
your conversations last time we're all
going to learn and we're not going to
get this exactly right the first time so
I feel like we're making excellent
progress one point if I can just make
we're concentrating on structures you
know and I sense that it's the long
siding long roof that we have there are
different ways of getting breaking up
that that that long walls and long long
roof you could do it by material you can
do it by modulation you can do it with
colors and make it you know meet meet
the requirements it doesn't have to be
strong
true well in this case we're looking at
the description in this style says the
steeper more complex roof forms vertical
emphasis distinguish the style for
craftsman so we have to put in the code
we're supposed to have a steeper more
complex roof form in what we'd see in
craftsman I I think Commissioner Liang
may be referring to some of the tools
that we had in the central Issaquah
standards which are not really available
anymore
at least in terms of this particular
style one comment obviously we've had a
little problem with a word complex here
yeah
and complexity I wonder as we go through
this and we use this tool and we're
turning up little variations like this
that are tough can we make notes for rev
a of this document even though it hasn't
been really release in final form yet
because I bet this is not the only
incident like this you know that will
come across yeah right I will tell you
like many commissioners who are hesitant
to design by commission I am going I'm
going to be hesitant about certain words
like asymmetrical and complexity trying
to define those in any kind of
prescriptive way I think the question is
as we go through this is there a clear
performance standard that provides
better guidance and I think Commissioner
Sanford is absolutely right if we can
identify those along the way we should
absolutely capture those likewise the
mayor's asked us as we get
interpretations from crandall ramble
I save all of those into a folder so
that likewise those can be incorporated
so I think your instincts are absolutely
right I think we just have to be careful
thinking that we will come up with a
cookbook I I think we're proud you know
I think it's going to be hard to get as
black and white a manual as we might
like
so so an idea with regard to the staff
proposed condition a roof um shall be
more complex with these 2 dormers and
their and/or increasing the scale the
stairwell roofs to create more visible
intersecting ridges a couple things here
one is I don't think just treating the
stairwell would be enough because we
still have the long run and and I'm fine
with the stairwells the way they are
I would rather change this language just
to say through the use of dormers or
other features in the roof and then
leave it to the staff and the applicant
that works for everybody
I would agree okay if that makes sense
loose yeah yeah I was I didn't start
typing because I didn't want to assume
that everyone was gonna agree with you
so so was it through the use of dormers
and/or dormers and/or other features
roof to create more roof features the
roof features and then you could just
put period that's a phrase right now
well roof forms shall bow okay we were
skipping that oh I think shall be made
more complex and so the through the use
of dormers or other features does that
work for everybody
get it should we say up or other
features found in the arts-and-crafts
guidelines you know I think if you open
it up to features then what does that
mean
yeah yeah more okay you can see the
shadow roof come back yeah there's a
chimney feature you say Arts and Crafts
style or consistent with the Arts and
Crafts style yeah
that's why we have lawyers
that works for me I like okay so let me
ask you thank you that was that was
great so do we need to mark any of the
of the boxes that are up here or do we
just assume that except where for
instance I've very I you might my
mousepad skills are kind of poor but
we're sort of coloring in this complies
here and then are we saying that pretty
much everything else is acceptable
except maybe the you know the three that
I boxed in on the right for a roof are
just kind of leaving them open to decide
how much we need of any of those so are
we feeling comfortable with the rest of
the manner in which staff filled out
this form I think so I thought you had
the appropriate for for the massing as
it's not complying in the asymmetrical
composition and elevation and volume and
we think it is asymmetric think it
complies with that that's where she's so
I've cut so right now though I've said
under description that it does not
comply because of the complex reform so
for now we would leave that and the
condition is to address it correct
is that good good form okay all right I
mean I just really quick since it looks
like we're dealing with this as it
conditions a staff have enough to work
with in the general sense of the
Commission here on what must be a
director of development finish the
finish line looks like here you know I
haven't had a chance to talk with the
applicant my thought is we could try to
proceed with this I also we also have
another meeting on the 16th so one way
to approach this might be to if we get
to this point approve this and we bring
the roof back for confirmation
the next meeting just because I think
we're still working through it and I
would like to make sure that you're not
going to be giving me feedback I can't
do anything with in a year I think the
good test is gonna be you could just
take whatever you come up with take it
around the staff and say does this look
complex okay and it'd be like you know
those Supreme Court and pornography and
stuff right know how to define it but I
need more clerks that's what I'll say
yeah there you go
okay so I feel like we have a means to
move forward from this page okay if the
commissioners agreed I think we I don't
want to lose the chimney I don't know if
this is the channel topic or not yes oh
sorry
yeah the chimney it's placement kind of
strikes me as inconsistent with the rest
of the building kind of superfluous
there was the appreciate the attempt to
be more a symmetrical and match the Arts
and Crafts style that is an
arts-and-crafts feature for sure seems
to stand out a little in Congress lay to
me wonder what the commissioners input
was on that I guess the one of my
thoughts would be the way it may tie in
is if you look at G 0.08 the
I guess the view coming if you're coming
down the trail and the view you'd see
there of the building the brick down
below is all going to be that raven
colored black brick and then that
chimney up above will be the raven
colored black brick and maybe those
those two tie together
well to try and be true to the design
manual I think that what Commissioner
Sanford is asking us to do is sort of
look at the notion of a prominent
chimney maybe in the context of
asymmetric ality we don't McMahon Yule
implies but does not state overtly is
sort of things that are authentic the
chimney while very well intended is
never going to be connected to any heat
source so I think the question is is the
visual benefit such that we would add
something folk exactly Lucy thank you
yeah yeah it's a faux chimney so it's it
feels superfluous to me and it's kind of
like form did not follow function error
because there's really no function I
made so the chimney although we did try
to make it look like the chimney is
required for the elevator shaft it's the
overrun for the elevator Oh perfect okay
I mean so something needs to be there
excellent so it isn't just alone there
for Al excellent idea the chimney that's
what I said I assumed it was functional
too and when I heard it was functional
good thing we have an architect in the
statement so are we comfortable leaving
the chimney then yeah okay great
[Music]
do some for smoke okay so are we done
with massing yeah I'm good with scale
right on the border 200 feet okay walls
eateries I guess a question to striking
out the natural and natural finish
board-and-batten so let me double check
that this is one thing that we spent a
long time asking Crandall Aram Beulah
about when we got to oh it does so it
does even in the final once a natural
stained or painted so the so one of our
concerns was that they they had a lot of
like true light true divided light
windows you know things that would not
have allowed you to use any hardy
materials that are painted that would
looked like exactly like
board-and-batten leads to the untrained
eye and there was a question on our part
you know they said no simulated stone
but does that mean you have to have full
stone well you know so trying to clarify
some of that so the ultimate way this
says this says natural board-and-batten
in the july draft but in the adopted
draft it says natural stained or painted
board-and-batten okay so if you're that
I think I struck it because it isn't
natural board-and-batten well no wonder
this said natural finish so maybe I just
meant to fin
not the actual natural wood but hmm okay
I'm good with it
it's another one of those things that we
can all interpret differently I would
interpret that is it's the actual
material that's exposed you might be
stained but it would be a natural
material that you would see I just don't
know that that's all we want to mandate
right because that takes away all kinds
of color and design options and and I
think that's where it's even though we
are using the July draft I think
sometimes the adopted draff is
informative about you know where we
ended up in weather that you know yeah
so does that mean we're okay with walls
yes yes I'm okay with walls yeah windows
I'm okay everyone okay with windows yes
okay then that would leave doors
I'm okay yeah I appreciate the design
changes to respond to criteria so I
think that was helpful
look very good okay next is roof which i
think is pretty straightforward go back
to green sheet language and then color
then natural context we received you
know public comment not tonight but in
writing about that so I want to make
sure that the Commission has an
opportunity to consider
I think staffs perspective was we didn't
really know what those terms were there
aren't any critical areas immediately
present the trail was shown on the map
that was not adopted at this point or
even except proposed at this point so I
think it's just a question of how the
Commission wants to interpret it I'm
fine with it okay I think this is going
to be another one of those world we'll
have discussions along the way with
different projects about what does that
mean I think the key is the context I
mean what's the circumstance that's
immediately surrounding but not just
that
what's the backdrop behind the project
coming backdrop behind this projects a
free way but it is you know something
we're enough to think about and we're
talking about integration remember even
when we're dealing with the Costco
expansion discussion and about miu
corridors and what does that mean trying
to make sure we're really leveraging the
the natural environment around the city
including the mountains that are around
the city so I think this is this is when
we'll be coming back to you more
but I think for this particular project
I'm comfortable with what we've got and
what I would add to Commissioner
Brennan's comments is that by the time
that we actually adopted it we actually
created a specific list the map is
illustrative because things can change
over time but there was a specific list
of triggers like a wet because some of
the areas that are shown here actually
developable land so we weren't trying to
take away anyone's rights on the other
hand I think that we feel that there is
a response necessary when you're
adjacent to certain features and what we
had to do was agree on what those
features were and so through the time
with land and shore committee we did
agree on a list of features so oh yeah I
think it will
so harmony you know I highlighted July
20th as you can see at the top of the
page and that is because that one was
pretty amorphous and by the time you
know we said we need something
measurable and you know something kind
of tangible and so if you look at the
one on the left which is the one that
was adopted it talks about certain kinds
of elements but it also identifies that
if you're using an architectural style
be and the result of that is that helped
create harmony now it may inform which
style you select you know that if you're
next or something that's more arts and
crafts you're probably not going to do
Grange but you know we also have to look
at the scale of the building and
sometimes as we so painfully learned
going through this project sometimes the
scale of a building does not lend itself
to the style that you might want to pick
this is one I've I think we're fine here
in this case I mean the colors they've
done a good job I think of sort of
matching the color palette to get that -
but this is one I'm fine with this I
think in the long term this is very
dangerous one for us to work with
because we're going to get a situation
where we get a say a single-family house
single-story and we want to build a
five-story building next to it and
somebody can say well that's not in
harmony with it and I think the idea of
incremental development that you always
have to build a house or a building in
harmony with the one right next to it
each time doesn't allow you to bring in
a lot of changes but I'm sorry I
shouldn't be no I think we had some of
the same questions and so if you look at
the description on the left it says that
there's a relationship between the new
building and the exist existing but the
intent not to require imitation or
copying
instead the integrity of existing
building shall be respected by
positively addressing nearby existing
development characteristics you know cuz
what we didn't want to was reiterate
something we're trying to move away from
back it's back to respecting the context
that you're developing in I mean whether
its natural or built it's gotta fit
again that's subjective in a lot of ways
too about what that looks like whether
we're talking about harmony between the
architecture style of a building or how
its interfacing with the natural
environment that's going on around it so
this is just part of the learning that
we're gonna do as we continue to apply
these but I you know I'm feeling as this
has been a little slow but I'm feeling
like as we do this a little bit more
it's gonna this tool set will help us so
much compared to what we were working
with before we go and and and I think
this is actually an example that's a
good one to start with in that respect
because it seems to me as I understand
it that the existing storage facility
was designed before these new standards
came into effect and now we spent all
this time with the new standards and
they're in effect and we're looking at
the district so I don't think it can I
don't think that with all the respect
the up house phenomenon you know the
movie it's going to be a permanent
factor for us for the city going forward
but the objective is to have these
districts with architectural better
architectural guidelines than we've had
before which is a really good thing for
for everybody involved but it inevitably
is going to inflict with the property
next door because we're changing and and
and I think that's a good point
as well as that there are some other
sections of the guidelines up in the
introduction as
as the contacts section which is talking
about both built and natural environment
I think that when we look at that it'll
help provide some guidance around
addressing that that very point okay
a block size so I I think that the I'm a
little confused by MS Marcia's comments
whether she was talking about something
back of the building or along the front
of the building that would form a
sidewalk kind of on the service road I
think that if we're if what she's
requesting is that there be pedestrian
features along that sort of service road
frontage I think that's fine and that
that a little sort of stub or sort of
gesture to the next property line so you
don't have to negotiate with the
property owner could certainly be made I
think if it's along i-90 I I guess I
would be concerned that doesn't seem
like the right place I do I think
everything the intent of this is to not
have super blocks and it's for breaking
up the grid the street grid into smaller
block sizes and this doesn't fit this
site doesn't fit that at all to me and I
feel like just the massing of the
building achieves it you know the fact
that they did break it down into two
separate yeah buildings it's actually
helps significantly yeah it is and if
you're thinking about an example is kind
of a gridded Street pattern with long
blocks and you do want to have the
ability to or pedestrians to travel
through without having to go all the way
around but this there's nothing on the
back of this so I tend to agree with
that what I think the requirement is
trying to get at doesn't fit with the
site conditions we have here okay so
we're in agreement that it's not
applicable
correct parking structures and Lots
separable implies you know I'm good with
the screening with provision that a
plantings are your goes out of condition
do we need a well we could certainly
make it one I think I think it's not
like we're saying it's wrong we're just
specifying what kind of plantings should
be implemented I think it's fine to make
it a condition that I I'm doubting that
the applicant is disgrace there's an
existing condition isn't there regarding
the screening right now I'm not sure
[Applause]
hmm maybe there isn't I think it's about
performing landscape screening as
opposed to so we um I think the intent
is that that the parking will area will
be screened right and so it's not
screened six months out of the year
screened the whole year so that's seems
to me to be pretty obvious for the
applicant to comply with that and I
don't even we need to emphasize it but I
have a condition 33 regarding the garage
lighting I don't know if you want to
check screening on to that or if it's
something completely different
yeah we could add that on there okay all
right
next is enclosure which we said complies
does the Commission agree and the the
appropriate went upper floors are set
back incorporate terraces and usable
would that just be n/a instead of
complies yes I think so
yeah
is there a dimensional requirement where
the step-back has to happen and what
height it was after the first four
floors and this buildings only for his
column that was in the yes I think you
made that der something and Dan made the
comment in the staff report so wouldn't
you right are we ready to move on to the
next one huh
yes we are okay setbacks ground-floor
retail
acceptable yeah complies yep
okay then setbacks natural areas and
what staff was basically saying is if we
don't have something that we're defining
as natural areas and this section
doesn't apply natural offering careful
so are we good to move on from the
ground floor entries this one we did
staff did propose a condition I have an
issue with this one and it's it's kind
of more with the code itself could you
pull up a 2.0 yep
maybe if you could zoom in just a little
bit did you want both of them both of
them if you could yeah great thank you
so I guess the issue I have just in
reading this in terms of the design
standard or the development stand at the
the idea of we're in essence saying we
want the retail in the front we want the
parking back behind but we don't want
you to get from the parking into the
retail we want you to have to go around
the building to get in the retail and
the real issue I see with this is with
the handicap stalls the two handicap
stalls in the middle there so if I'm in
a wheelchair and I get out of my van and
then I look across I want to go into
that retail space there's a door there
that's going to be serviced and
employees only and I'm gonna have to go
outside and come back in the entry of
the retail and then it's even further to
get around to the other entry for the
retail which makes me wonder are we
would we be violating any 88 codes well
I'll tell you if we're violating 88
codes that trumps everything but I will
tell you that we pushed a lot on this
particular provision you know as qua
Highlands has those double-faced
buildings but you know Crandall or
ambulance point is a valid one that what
we saw it at is qua Highlands is that
some of the shops have put essentially
their back door to the street and their
front door to the parking lot and it was
a real battle and we had enough trouble
just getting the two doors many of them
didn't even want a front door to the
street so I understand their concern is
that if
you're really building a pedestrian
environment then we need to put all of
our sort of towards the street point
well-taken
about a DA you're right it has to be
closest to the entry and if there was a
concern that for instance this entry
needs to be open to because of a DA
parking I think that would take
precedence over our pedestrian
orientation but what about the other the
upper one would you have to have a door
from the garage fraid either that or you
can require them to go out and around I
believe so
it my understanding is that it has you
have to put the ad a as close as
possible where the parking is but we
don't have to be close the proposed
conditions if there was parking in front
of the building then you would put it
there yeah but there's not so okay you
know I it's a good question and I
imagine as we got through this review
with the building department I will
become more informed you know every time
you go through this you learn something
new and it's a good question and I'll
let you know when we have another
building and I would agree that your
interpretation is correct of what's
written with the only provision buna
talks about parking lots and could a
parking garage be considered something
different than a parking lot but I don't
see that I can make that stretch you
know it talks about entries directly
from parking lots shall be limited to
service employee and so forth and this
is a parking garage another parking lot
but legally I think you're you're right
I think we're all ok with the ad a
access it's just a little bit longer to
travel and you know the layout probably
needs to be revisit kind of shortened to
travel
and the vehicle to retail and we're
assuming all the handicapped folks are
going to retail and they may go up to
the elevator and go up to the upper
floors so I think that's an interesting
point about the customer entries access
directly from parking lots or alleys
so I'll pursue making sure that I'm not
overly narrowly interpreting that and
it's more of my mind is more than one of
those longer review thing you know down
the road reviewing a standard now maybe
this is worth flagging for a section to
revisit yeah more closely I tend to
agree with the underlying intent about
rating the activity at the front of the
building and pushing the pedestrians out
there and in this particular building
you actually have from the parking
garage this pathway that leads between
the two buildings that get you to the
it's not that far to travel and and the
ad a requirement is closest proximity
it's feasible to the main entrance but
and a safe path of travel so I think
they've probably accomplished that with
this question though is really about you
know in the future now what do you what
are we trying to do is these buildings
these particularly larger retail uses
that are going to her as more buildings
develop I think if you push that's it
push it the way that Lucy's interpreting
this now it drives a design solution
like this that you want to provide a
nice pathway to get people to the
commercial uses in your building instead
of driving through the back door from
the garage see yeah okay yeah okay
okay so that sounds like we're okay with
this page yes luck Tinley well I'm it
looks like there were a lot of changes
in the adopted version and I can't read
it fast enough because my brain is just
kind of frying at this point so it may
be we may have actually different text
when we are using the adopted version
ground-floor commercial entries had the
same issue oh thank you
I'm good with ground fire and then
transparency this one was requiring a
little bit larger window on the eat the
west face of the East Wing okay the
condition addresses the design concerns
yeah okay and then a I'm sorry just back
up one second because actually in terms
of checking the box not come food we see
not complying with this hmm would it be
the very guideline at the top that would
not comply yeah
sorry that's a good point
thank you yeah no thank you okay and
then ground floor commercial complied
bring staffs perspective Commission
agree agree and and then last second to
last is the weather protection so
somewhere here we'd have to say not
comply hmm I got complied crazy huh part
of this is this is practice though is
how are we going to fill out the
checklist because if we say we could say
does not comply and then when we have it
does not comply there would be a
condition yeah right that would bring it
into compliance but then you check the
box complex now the condition brings it
in compliance so anyway so I think we
just have to decide which we're gonna do
it and then just keep doing it that way
or complies with condition yeah I think
that does not comply flags it and then
that canned it brings you to the
condition that says there's a condition
that needs to be addressed to bring into
compliance yeah and and you know to get
full full plan or wonk on after you
assuming that you approve this project
Dan will be drafting findings and
conclusions and basically that's what
the findings and conclusions say is that
with the conditions it complies you know
and so it's not just that it complies
but that with the conditions as written
it complies so I mean I I think there
that this sort of helps tie that loop
back together but I agree that's that's
one of our sort of outstanding questions
okay and then and then the last is the
usable open space agree agree okay go
team all right so what I will do is
while you speak with Dan about the
briefing response memo I'll work on the
conditions to edit some of them relative
to what you've done this evening so now
we opened up for questions on the
briefing response mental score comment I
just walk
so do you have should we just should we
just go through the staff reponses
responses and see if we agree with what
he's done
sure is that what you're thinking Lucy
I'm not thinking so I'm real quick just
from a process standpoint I'm trying to
a lot of the responses that are in the
briefing response memo we've already
just talked back uh-huh so I'm just from
a time standpoint I'm just wondering
what are the are there specific topical
areas that need additional discussion or
do we think that they've adequately been
addressed in the conversation as we've
gone through the design standards I feel
like we address them and then we even
provided condition or investigating the
complexity of the room so I feel like it
was I think most of that's been all
driven around the design standards but
any of the you're circling back to
circling back to the beginning yeah yeah
so the design manual covered topics two
and three so if you have any questions
or concerns about whether the other
topics have been appropriately addressed
and okay we're the trail connection
Plaza fall under this category correct
yeah yeah okay
so I wonder if we just walked through
you know the the first procedures number
one did we have
does anybody have any concerns with the
responses with regard to our purview or
the district vision
okay so the sense is that we've resolved
there were comfortable comfortable with
two and three do you want to talk about
those as well yeah I just went through
the deadline yeah yeah so two and three
would have been with the discussion we
just had it yeah
[Applause]
and in terms of the I guess into for the
elevator shaft I would agree with the
condition that's been added and the
language regarding the screening the
plant screen uh-huh
as well Roger likes I do appreciate the
additional they brought down the
building to screen the lights and yes in
general I've said I think I appreciate a
lot of the changes that you've made from
our last meeting to address things you
didn't very good job so I believe I
think we talked about bundling in the
year-long plants or for screening
bundling that in with the garage lights
condition I believe that there is
already a parking screening condition
that we might be able to to include that
with right that was number 33 Dan so the
the original condition and I apologize
because I don't have it
yeah I I have this I'm not sure that it
let's let it says garage lighting with
the building permit the applicant will
provide photo photometric plans and
other lighting details to demonstrate
compliance with CI DDS chapter 17
lighting especially for parking
standards well I think the one that Dan
may be referring to is number 13 from
the original staff report which talks
about the surface parking lot shall be
softened with the required 10%
landscaping provision of winter I mean
it states
additionally the applicant shall provide
plans to be reviewed with construction
permits that demonstrate compliance with
15.3 so we could add another sentence to
that number condition number 13 or it
could go on 33 either one that says that
the plantings on the east side of the
building associated with the grid screen
will
climbing evergreen will provide
year-round school
yep no something like that which
condition it goes on - that's like 13
was more this better yeah nine
it would we be to five the plaza design
[Applause]
you know I I appreciate the fact that
they got a meeting together and got
input from some different groups and and
and I think what they've come up with is
a better better Plaza I don't feel like
we should hold this up and say we need
to come up with a grand entrance to
Issaquah course a developer to come up
with with something that is grander than
what they've come up with for this
already but is that because the status
of this is kind of tenuous at this point
whether that trail connection applause
will even exist well I guess that and
and I I don't know it seems like they've
met the intent of creating a Waystation
the tools the bench the extent that the
city wants to do a bunch more signage or
other stuff yeah I guess my thought was
I wonder if there is an opportunity
there there was a beautiful redesign of
I guess it's called a building Plaza and
it's very verdant and lots of planting
in there and I wonder if any of that
could be migrated into the front rail
collect and connection plazas well I
wonder if there's a tree opportunity
there instead of the hardscape that's
being referred to so I think that no dan
go ahead so that is King County did
provide us with a trail section some
guidelines with that we we can do some
shrubs but we cannot do any trees within
15 feet of the edge of pavement
okay so we're constrained by the county
there we are constrained by that yeah
however didn't you say Dan attended the
meeting I didn't didn't you say that the
that that this drawing is
representational of sort of the
hardscape and structural elements but
that landscape along the edges was
planned so you can do some like shrubs
some shrubs but even those have a
setback requirement okay of the 15 feet
no I believe it's three feet
right so I think we would look to have
some kind of shrubs but again that's
part of the negotiation with the county
they had a rather natural palette that
they identified as my memory correct
that that is true so we would work it
out with them and and again they did
provide us with some some of those
guidelines and and I provided that with
it with the last presentation I don't
have it here now I think also in the
stakeholder meeting they recommended
that that cover be consistent with the
storage building is that right is that
the intent or is it to be more
consistent with our law office building
so I believe that the roof structure of
that trellis would be designed to match
for the storage building are you is that
not the right image
I didn't have a picture right ah here we
go thank you
so we we identified this I guess it's a
some sort of roof overhang or trellis
trellis and that we would used that same
design to to work with the plaza trellis
well I think the work they've done is
definitely an enhancement with we had
previously the idea of trying to connect
back into the buildings I think is good
I think in this idea of this grand
arrival plaza well that's not really in
my mind yeah you have an arai you've
arrived at Gilman Boulevard and some
buildings nearby but you haven't it's
not like a public a large public place
or community center or anything like
that so I mean the idea is they want
people to actually keep going heading to
Old Town and buy stuff so or just keep
bicycling
so I think I think this idea of it so
kind of this point where you can pause I
mean you're at a kind of major
intersection you can pause you can you
know hopefully I'd have to fix your bike
but if you have to hey you might have
some tools handy it's fine I the idea of
softening it with landscaping as best we
can within the limits that were given
with the county I think is a good idea
to do that but you also have now you can
have this discussion about who's gonna
maintain this and I think that's going
to be the root of the debate get to some
agreement yeah that's the more you put
in the more costly if he comes to take
care of it
imagine that's a city responsibility
then right as I understand that King
County has had bad experiences uh-huh
but I think we're happening to be able
to do because the applicant is actually
prepared to me
so I think we're kind of hoping we could
do some is okay
I don't want to misspeak for you Bob I
thought that was where we were so I
think we're hoping maybe there's some
kind of cosign partnership things so
that the city functions as a backstop
but you know we have to we've only met
once with them and there's additional
discussion necessary look a procedural
question on this so this is a condition
of that development agreement that they
do the plaza which requires the cat
Knight I don't have the development
agreement open and go back to was there
uh was there an out if there was okay
that never mind you don't need to go any
farther that's funny because it hangs up
this whole permitted there's not a
off-ramp
all right
were there any other shoes so you want
on building plasma in closet we like
what they did with the building Plaza I
think that's going to be a nicer space
to pause and it'll be good for the
retail users I think it'll be more
attractive there's seating I think it
was previously I thought it was fairly
stark and not inviting and I think I
think the new idea is the water feature
I think is is nice yeah yeah all right
Randy mission there is your dog friendly
water fountain five point two point C so
I think the what we were discussing
earlier was that there was some hope
that there be a a water fountain on the
trail pause aside but that's not that's
not possible
yeah you got to run water you got to run
dream well and again it's still county
owned properties Oh parking
oh I I did I was checking so City of
Seattle requires one stall per mm square
feet for storage and one per 1,000
square feet for office so half a stall
per thousand for storage one for office
and I looked at the lost portion the
45,000 square feet are required is 35
which would be 0.78 per thousand which
is right in between but the provided is
43 which I calculate to be 0.96 per
thousand which provided about one per
thousand which seems to match the city
of seattle requirements for office
parking so it seems to fit in general
with what seattle is doing and maybe
what their basis was for whatever they
approved there so I'm fine with the
parking yeah the the this required kind
of a different approach because you know
we do have our own parking standards for
office we recognized this is a is
something entirely different that needed
to be evaluated on a case-by-case basis
and are we good with the recomendation
to remove conditions 10 11 and 12 but we
would be adding a condition to address
the loading spaces
I'm fine with the traffic signal yep
Treece I'm fine with environmental the
people think about the trees
well the reality is with that
significant design change as far as
on-site plantings for additional trees
there's not a lot of opportunity for
that and there was an attempt to try to
do some agreement with wash dot and that
wasn't successful which is unfortunate
but they have no reasons I'm sure
liability possibly so I mean at this
point this is kind of still ultimate
solutions not yet defined you know what
the tree plantings are going to be and
where they're going to be although
there's a requirement to meet threshold
that's necessary so I'm I'm not seeing
it would be nice to see more on-site but
the reality is I just don't know that
it's a practical thing to advance at
this point this project I think we've
done a lot to try to enhance areas where
we're going to have the interaction with
the pedestrians at the front of the
building hopefully we can get a little
bit more with the plaza and trail Reiser
off the site already right well aren't
those trees that are behind it those are
all cottonwoods I mean they're all kind
of dangerous trees that we don't want
around anyway
you nice if you get the state to agree
to let us replace them yeah well we also
anticipate on the property line common
with Pigott cheese who also has some
very big cottonwoods like that that we
may request as part of our permit
application to a joint redevelopment of
that landscape strip so that it's more
appropriate yeah
but we can't do that till we get a
little further it seemed like be nice if
the state would agree to say as part of
the tree planning for this to take out
those cottonwoods and something better
in there but it would it be would it be
constructive for us to just note that is
the sense of the Commission the
Development Commission to acknowledge a
public comment to the effect that this
site should have as many trees as is
possible within the plan yeah absolutely
and that is a condition it's condition
14 of the original staff report in issue
14 condition 14 is that we will continue
to try to identify areas where we can
plant trees on site and for those where
you know they will have a required
number of trees that they have to
replant if you know I'm just throwing
out a number here if they're required to
replant 40 and they can get 10 then the
other 30 will need to be planted
off-site or paid into the city tree fund
but but I do think if you if you look at
the condition 14 I think we could add
some language about the goal is to get
as many trees as healthful is this
health I can't even speak at this point
that's what happens when you have to
commission nights in a row when we have
then Shore tomorrow yes we have another
one here's this longer yeah so let me
add let me out I just type up some
language for you to look at to add to
the last item is the bus stop
yeah yeah and I'm at a bus-stop expert I
think we want to located it in the most
optimum spot works for transit service
and and those conversations the
applicant did reach out to Metro and and
I've been in contact with them too so
that's ongoing okay more comments
questions concerns do you want to go to
a motion we have a motion to make was he
ready for us to go to a motion I am at
your service others read that then so I
moved that the development commission
approved site development permit number
SDP 1 7 - 0 0 0 0 3 for the Issaquah
loss project number prj 1 7 - 0 0 0 1 2
as described and evaluated in the staff
report dated March 23rd 2018 with
exhibits a through g the briefing
response memo dated April 25th 2018 with
exhibits a through E the project
drawings and reports received November
16 2017 and all subsequent Middle's up
to April 19 2018 and subject to the
conditions contained in the staff report
and removed and new conditions contained
in the brief in response memo new
condition numbers 25 26 and 28 through
34 well yeah we're so they just removed
I just go ahead and read numbers 25 to
34 if I we've got the rest of it up on
the screen okay and remove conditions
number 10 11 12 and 27 oh well that
wasn't in the
oh okay do you see what I'm saying so I
just read it as written and then say and
as amended right and as amended tonight
great should I go ahead and read it you
can read them or not read them or you
could just say or as amended tonight and
we've got this up and we will do this as
the basis look at 13 and 14 and make
sure you're comfortable with that
language and is that the west side the
west side of the east side thank you see
that's why I have you read these things
you're testiness good yeah it was
intentional I mean Arctic on 14 both
prayer well you have to eliminate both
but practical and cognizant of tree
health and public safety okay
as millions I'm sorry Lucy you got I
hate to be a grammarian here but no I
love it I really tells out because
you've got free are we comfortable with
the word may be many many trees as many
trees uh-huh
yes where do we want to say minimum of
no no okay yeah as many trees as
possible okay with under those
conditions they need to be healthy and
creative own safety list are they
located
loosely the second part would do you
want us to vote on the first and then
vote on the second so that is your
tradition you VDC reads the whole thing
and votes on it all at the same time so
I think it's just whatever your you
would prefer
yes comfortable doing all's one let's go
for it and I move that the Development
Commission directed development services
department to prepare findings of fact
and conclusions or review and approval
by the development commission chair
forming the development Commission's
decision to approve this qual loss
project site development permit number
SDP 17.000 0-3 subject conditions
listing the staff modified the briefing
response been MOU and as amended tonight
period second we have a motion it's been
seconded is there discussion further
discussion real quick it's the
complexity issue on the roof so we're
approving this permeate with that as a
condition so we're done then we pass
this motion if I understand I just like
you know who to blows in favor of the
proposal the motion to approve say aye
aye opposed motion carries thank you and
I think unless people want to stay a
little longer I think we are before we
adjourn oh I think we have at least one
commission member it's leaving the
Commission yeah mr. commissioner they
long so I just thought it would be
important just to take a moment to say
it's been amazing working with you for
the many years that I've been on the
Commission and you've been here many
more than that so a 20 plus or or so so
I just
it's an incredible commitment to the
community and we'll really appreciated
your perspective and sharing your
comments and best of luck to you with
whatever you decide to do from here
you're here thank you thank you we're
glad that you made the right choice and
move from planning policy to Development
Commission that's right that's right I
was with the PPC for about two three
years and just didn't see a lot of
things coming up this policy and as you
know it takes quite a while before you
see something happens even every so ray
do you have a plan to replace the income
that you're gonna lose from talk to my
wife about there but I understand or you
guys are getting a five percent raise
yeah I would like to let me know what
you're getting your so thank you very
much for you sir thank you right and I
would like to thank the members of the
public that commented and that may have
been watching on the television so thank
you for your participation
we always like the public to come down
and provide input it's really critical
and vital to us so thank you for your
time and let's call a meeting adjourn
thank you
you