Good evening and welcome. I would like
to call the November 19th city of Isiqua
Development Commission meeting to order
at 6:35 p.m. As a reminder, we have a
remote aspect to our meetings. This
means both staff and members of the
public may be participating in the
meeting remotely via WebEx. For those
attending remotely, if you have
questions or issues, please send the
host a chat message or email staff at
emilymeed
isquawah.gov.
Excused absences for this meeting are
Commissioner Price, alternate member
Jeff Mayo is filling in for this evening
as a regular member.
Our first item of business is to take
action on meeting minutes for October
15, 2025. Has everyone had an
opportunity to review the minutes?
Are there any corrections to the October
15th minutes provided in the agenda
packet?
Hearing none, the minutes are approved
as submitted.
Next, I would like to open the floor for
any members of the public in person or
virtually who would like to make a
general comment. There will be a public
hearing later in the meeting for those
who would like to comment on the Isiqua
High School number four and elementary
school number 17 on the project.
Miss Jackson, has anyone signed up to
make general public comments?
>> No, Chair, they have not.
>> Okay. Would anyone here like to make
general public comments?
Okay.
Our first agenda item is pre-decision
open record public hearing. The order of
operation for this hearing will be as
follows. First, the purpose of the
public hearing followed by our
appearance of fairness doctrines. Then
we'll open the public hearing with a
staff presentation followed by an
applicant presentation. Then open the
floor for public comment. There will be
opportunity for rebuttal by applicant
then staff and then we will close the
public hearing.
That will be followed by commission
deliberation, commission action and vote
and concluding the agenda item. If for
any reason the public hearing cannot be
completed this evening, it may be
continued at a specific date.
This is the formal public hearing for
the proposed major amendment to the
master site plan and site development
permit for Isiqua High School number
four and elementary school number 17.
The purpose of this hearing is to
solicit relevant public comment and
facilitate the review, discussion, and
decision on the application by the
development commission. This is a quasi
judicial hearing.
Emily, please proceed with our
appearance of fairness disclosures.
We we can't hear the audio from the room
online.
Commissioner Fashion, can you hear me?
>> Okay.
>> No, I can't. I couldn't before. No, now
I can.
>> Perfect. Thanks for letting me know.
Right. Give me one second to share my
screen. All
right, starting with the appearance of
fairness.
Um so before we start our public
hearing, we'll go through uh the
appearance of fairness with our
commissioners and audience members. Um
this is a quasi judicial hearing. So the
decision context um is that it requires
proceedings to be fair in fact and
appearance. Exparte contacts are
prohibited. And the test is would a
disinterested person knowing the
totality of a decision maker's personal
interest in a matter be reasonably
justified in thinking that partiality
may exist. Decision makers who have
personal interest, prejudgment of issues
or partiality are disqualified from the
proceedings.
So I will begin with questions for the
commissioners. uh please just reply in
the affirmative um after each question
with the regard to the outcome of this
proceeding. Do you have a personal
interest financial or otherwise in the
outcome?
>> No.
>> No.
>> No.
>> Does your employer have an interest
financial or otherwise in the outcome?
>> No.
>> No.
>> Do you have any familial, social, or
business relationships or connections
with any of the parties or nonparties
who have an interest in the outcome?
>> No.
>> No. No.
>> Do you have any special knowledge about
the substantive or the merits of this
proceeding which would or could cause
you to prejudge the outcome?
>> No.
>> No.
>> No.
>> Will there be any prospective employment
for you or your family as a result of
the decision?
>> No.
>> No.
>> Do you own or control property within
300 ft of the subject property?
>> No.
>> No.
>> No. Have you had any exparte
communications regarding this project?
>> No.
>> No.
>> No.
>> Thank you.
>> Overall, do you believe you can sit and
hear this matter fairly and impartially
both as to the respective positions of
the proponents and the opponents of this
matter?
>> Yes.
>> Yes.
>> Thank you. Commissioners, questions for
the audience. Does anyone in attendance
wish to challenge the participation of
any commissioner based on the appearance
of fairness doctrine?
Okay. Any objections virtually? If you
have a virtual objection, please type
objection into the chat window or raise
your hand.
No.
All right.
Thank you. Now I open the public hearing
at
6:40 p.m. First, we'll proceed with the
staff presentation. Emily, I'll need to
swear you in. Please state your name and
position with the city for the record.
>> Emily Medina, senior planner.
>> Do you swear by oath or affirmation that
the testimony you're about to provide is
true? I do.
>> Thank you. Please proceed. Thank you. So
tonight we're here uh for our public
hearing to hear about the Isqua High
School number four and elementary school
number 17 master site plan and site
development permit major amendment.
Uh a little background on the uh context
of the project. It is located at 4221
228th Avenue Southeast. It's zoned CFF
which is our community facilities
facility zoning with a designate land
use designation of community facilities
and it is in the Providence Point sub
area.
So uh going into the history of this
permit as we are here tonight to talk
about an amendment to the original
permit. So, a site development permit
and a master site plan as well as uh
multiple administrative adjustment of
standards um were heard before a public
hearing before the development
commission and then a decision was
issued by city council. Uh it was
approved with 52 land use conditions
which incorporated 82 SEIPA mitigation
measures all of which still apply to the
project today um even with the
amendment. The original proposal was for
a consolidated high school and
elementary school campus. Uh this
includes many site amenities such as a
stadium with track and field and
grandstands, baseball and softball
fields, tennis courts, outdoor learning
space, playground, parking garage, and
then the typical landscaping circulation
utility improvements on site.
So the process for the amendment um this
procedure is reviewed under the current
isqua municipal code. In the current
isqua municipal code, there is no longer
a master site plan permit. Um so
amendments to my master site plan
permits are combined with the criteria
for site development permits. So only
one amendment application is required as
the uh review criteria are the same. um
it is required to go through a major
amendment process due to the change of
the facade that's greater than 10% and
changes that are inconsistent with what
was originally uh approved. So that a
major amendment requires a level four
review which requires a hearing in a
decision by the development commission.
The scope of this review is narrow. It
is focused on the proposed changes and
the compliance of those changes with the
code.
So, uh, when it comes to code
compliance, this project is vested to
the 2021 land use code. So, the code
that was in place when applied. Um, as I
said, the conditions of the approved SDP
and MSP and associated SEPA, MDNS
mitigation measures still apply to this
project. Um, compliance of the proposed
changes was reviewed against by all
original approval criteria in code
sections in that vested code. that
includes the design checklist and all
all the various um sections of the
vested code. Many sections of the code
were not impacted by the proposed major
amendment. Um the staff report is
organized in order of code sections and
you'll see some are just outlined as
being not applicable as the proposed
amendment does not impact those code
sections. Um the presentation will just
focus on the key changes and the
compliance of the application with those
key changes.
So the proposed changes um the first one
is with the phasing. It used to just be
phase one and phase two with the
original application. It has now been
split up with phase one being split into
phase 1 A and phase 1B. Phase two the
elementary school remains. Um what's so
phasing is the first part that is under
review tonight um within the development
commission scope. The second part is the
building design for phase 1A. So, um the
changes of that include entry revisions.
So, a canopy has been added to the entry
and it's been shifted a bit. Um the
loading dock and trash enclosure area
has been relocated on the site. It um
used to be on the west on the east side
and now it is on the west. Um there's a
additional outdoor classroom space and
then revisions of the facade um
including window and roof heights. Uh
when it comes to the site, the revisions
that are proposed with the amendment are
the parking at the entryway. Um the
orientation has been changed. One
additional tree is being removed. And
then there are some landscape changes to
accommodate the phasing. So the
landscape changes for instance with the
loading dock and trash enclosure moving.
There's new landscaping around those and
fences and walls to meet the review
criteria. And then there's also
modifications to some plantings um
materials on site like talk the fence
and walls due to moving site elements um
as well as storm and utilities and these
are all to accommodate the design and
programming changes of the building.
So looking at the phasing um phase one
from the original prop approved plan
like I said is now proposed as phase 1 A
and phase 1 B. Phase 1 A is in the green
on your screen. 1B is the yellow and
phase two is the red. Phase 1 A includes
the all the street improvements, the
circulation except for the access road
back to the elementary school. It
includes landscaping such as all the
street trees that are required along the
roads um and the landscaping around the
parking garage for instance. Um it
includes building of the west wing of
the high school, the track and field and
bleachers and a portion of the parking
garage. You can see the southern portion
is highlighted in green for phase 1 A.
Phase 1B will complete all the original
phase 1 work which includes the east
wing of the high school, the remainder
of the parking, baseball and softball
fields and all their associated walls.
It will complete the stadium and the
grand stands and the remaining site
improvements. There's no change to phase
two which is the elementary school. And
then um of note is that each phase must
meet all code requirements. So we're not
just assessing the end of phase 1B or
the end of what was phase one that it
meets code that where phase 1 A stops
must also meet all code requirements.
So one of the changes that I talked
about was the parking. Um so highlighted
here uh the top circle is where parking
changed from angled to parallel near the
school entry. Um the parking structure
like we just saw on that schematic is
now split between two phases. Um the
original approved one of the original
approved AAS's um it's AAS 21002
allows for shared parking for the
stadium and the school. Um so what was
done is it essentially was assessed how
much parking would be required for the
stadium and how much parking would be
required for the school and whichever
was more is the number that was used for
required parking for the site. that same
as and that same uh method is applied to
the phasing. Um so what's required for
car parking is 178 spaces and what's
proposed far exceeds it with 341.
89 of those were required to be in
structure and 173 are proposed to be in
the structure. Um for bicycle parking
nine spots are required for phase 1 A
and 24 are proposed.
Um so for the landscaping changes so all
landscaping must adhere to all code
requirements at the end of phase 1 A. Um
so this is assessing to make sure where
the construction stops at phase 1 A
everything is met. Um some changes
include uh parking area landscaping. You
know since only half the parking
structure is being built at phase 1 A
making sure that all that perimeter
landscaping is going to be there. Um the
rooftop architectural element. Um it's a
certain square footage that had to be
met. So with only half the parking
structure being built, um more
architectural element needed to be
built. So that phase 1A complied with
the required square footage of
architectural treatment on the rooftop.
Um so architectural element was added on
the southernmost portion of the screen.
You can see that in the blue crosshatch.
Um and then fencing and walls like I
mentioned earlier because of some of the
moving of the pro programmatic elements
um especially the trash enclosure and
loading dock. um some the landscaping
had to be assessed to make sure they
were properly screened um to make sure
that all the plantings were in place and
the walls and fences that were proposed
because of these changed programmatic
elements met the code. Um and then one
additional tree is being removed. Um the
tree retention still complies and uh
even with the one removal there's no
change in the percent that's retained
from the original approval.
All right. So, building design um the
building design for phase 1 A was uh
reviewed against the design criteria
checklist and all changes comply with
the design criteria checklist that's
included as an exhibit to the staff
report. Um going through what those
major changes are, facade changes, um
the entry revision to the north building
um to add entry doors and a metal
canopy. Uh the canopy and fencing on the
south side for the new outdoor classroom
space. Um that's and then the window
locations and roof heights changed um
due to the interior programmatic
changes. They had to move around some
windows. And then you can see some color
changes, but it still maintains the
earth tones and maintains compliance um
with the design criteria.
And the last one is the mechanical
equipment. Um the location change at the
high school um it's required to meet all
of the waste enclosure and screening
requirements. So, it meets those
setbacks, design, screening. Um, it has
a masonary wall and ornamental fencing
and a black vinyl chain link gate.
And then the last kind of group of
changes is the site design. Um, so what
you're seeing on your screen with a
schematic is the phase 1A storm water
plan. Um, everything circled in red is a
storm water detention facility. So the
original approval had storm water vaults
and detention ponds in seven locations.
The proposed phase 1A has a combination
of seven structures still. Um it just
includes one vault and six detention
ponds. Um future phases proposed to
convert several of the detention ponds
into vaults. Um all storm water
facilities must fully must be fully
constructed and operational in
accordance with the approved plans at
the time of each phases completion. Um
and as proposed that will be met um and
is of course also reviewed further with
construction permitting. All frontage
improvements and internal circulation
except for the elementary school access
road will be constructed as part of
phase 1 A.
Is there any questions?
>> Richard.
Um,
first I wonder how does the change in
the phasing affect the overall project
time frame? Do we know?
>> I will let the applicant speak to that
during their presentation, but the
timing of the phasing is not a criteria
that is evaluated against.
>> Okay.
So land use condition 42
says that financial security is required
in lie of providing the financial
security school district shall provide a
letter of commitment identifying the
scope of work to be completed and the
time frame for completion. Is that
correct?
>> Correct.
>> Okay. Thanks. And I was curious about
how many vaults will we have by the end
of phase one including 1 A and 1B. Um,
looks like 1A will only have one vault.
Is that right? And at the end of first
phase, how many underground vaults will
we have and how many detention ponds?
>> Um, our city engineer is online and I
will let her answer the engineer related
questions. Uh, she'll provide far more
accuracy than I would. Um, Elaine, are
you able to answer that question?
Um, so I I guess you can repeat the
question. You're asking how many balls
are going to be after phase one.
>> Correct.
>> Correct. Both both the uh subphases A
and B.
>> So for phase one, the vault will be
underneath the the baseball field. I
mean underneath the football fields. And
then for phase B, um the ponds by that
that are out by the baseball fields will
be converted to underground vaults when
the baseball fields are built.
Okay. So, will that be five at that
point?
>> Five.
>> There'll be two vaults and then there's
uh I think
four or five ponds that are around the
perimeter of the property.
>> Okay. Okay. And uh the staff report
refers to the clearing and grading
beyond phase one and subsequent phase 1B
area is necessary to serve the project
due to site improvements such as storm
water and utilities. Can you speak to
which necessary site improvements such
as storm water and utilities will be
required in the elementary school area
in phase 1 A? In other words, in phase 1
A, which of those improvements that will
occur
in the elementary school area are
actually required for phase 1 A.
>> I'm going to defer to to uh Todd, who is
the design engineer, to answer some of
these questions um about the specifics
of what the design entails. Should we
save some of these till after the
>> application?
Save that for the applicant. Thank you.
>> Some of the more specific engineering
ones the applicant can get into the
technical details.
>> Yeah. And I do have more but I'm going
to delay those chair in the interest of
time if I am able to recall staff during
deliberation.
>> Thank you.
>> Y thank you.
Now we'll proceed with the applicants.
>> I'm sorry.
>> Oh, sorry. Go ahead, Mel.
>> It's okay. Um question on um condition
11. I think it was had a requirement
that if complete applications for future
phases hadn't been filed by the time the
high school building receives its
temporary certificate of occupancy, no
further extensions would be granted. So
now we have two high schools. Is there a
decision as to does it mean would that
mean that both phases of the high school
are built or just phase 1A?
>> Can you repeat the wording of the
condition again? Which one you referring
to?
>> It says condition 11, if complete
applications for construction permits
for future phases have not been filed by
the time the high school building
receives its temporary certificate of
occupancy,
no further extensions shall be granted.
So does that mean
>> so the building permit for the next
phase needs to be submitted prior to TCO
for the first phase.
>> Yes.
>> And does that mean TCO for phase 1 A or
>> correct for phase 1 A?
>> So just the first Okay.
>> Correct.
Sorry, I'm trying to read it, see it in
my mind. But yes, for phase 1A, the I
believe the wording of the condition
says for future phases. So now that it's
split up, the first phase, the second
phase would need to be submitted for by
the first phase TCO.
>> Okay, thank you.
>> Could you describe the programming
changes that that drove this the changes
in building
>> that one? And I will also let the
applicant describe the motivation behind
the changes.
>> Okay. What the other just the follow on
would be was it significant enough that
the the need for the space wasn't
required? So you did two phases or was
that a constructability? I I'll wait for
them. Thanks.
>> Any other staff questions?
>> All right. Now we'll proceed with the
applicant's presentation.
And before you begin, I'll need to swear
you in.
>> One second.
Good evening. My name is Todd Sawin. I'm
a civil engineer with AHBL re
sorry um representing the applicant.
>> Do you swear by oath or affirmation that
the testimony you're about to provide is
true?
>> I do.
>> Thank you. Please proceed.
So, um, there's a lot of information in
the record. Really thank staff and all
of you for being here tonight to talk
about our project. Um, we've been on a
long process to get here. I think Emily
did a really good job of explaining, you
know, the work to get up to the 2022
approval and then what we've been doing
to get to here. So, I'm not going to
cover all the details of stuff. I'm
happy to answer questions and things
when we get to the end. There's some key
pieces I want to talk about. a couple of
the questions you you've brought up
already. So, um I'm I'm gonna kind of
try to keep my part brief and so we can
have as much time for public comment as
possible, but again, I'm happy to answer
questions. Um
okay, so the original amendment Emily
mentioned that we're so we have a whole
bunch of conditions on this project and
you guys have been referencing them kind
of in discussions already. So, we're not
changing any of those. So the idea that
we need to submit the next phase of
building permit before we get TCO, the
school district totally understands that
idea. Um and if we don't do that, we
have to come back through the land use
process. So that piece we we totally
understand the um economics of the
project. Obviously the school district's
a public public agency. You know them
being able to do projects is based on
funding. So, they have funds to do phase
1A. Right now, they're going to acquire
funds for the future phases. Um, Martin
can talk later if you guys have specific
questions about that process, but um
it's a little bit unknown on our side
just based on the way funding and
bonding and all that stuff works. Um,
so Emily mentioned that the phase 1A
portion of the site, we meet the code
requirements. So that's the code
requirements for the landscaping, the
storm water. So the storm water system
we're proposing meets the department of
ecology storm water manual as currently
adopted by the city of Isiqua. That is
the one thing that we took to the new
code. Well, there's a couple things
we've taken to new code. So for life
safety purposes, we took we using the
current um building code. So we're
vested to the 2015 code. decided that
what made more sense was to use current
codes. So, um, same thing with storm
water. There's no reason for us to not
come to the new manual. So, what you're
seeing is meeting the current storm
water code for for those two pieces.
From a land use perspective, we're still
vested to the old city code. So, there's
a few nuances in that. Um, as part of
those improvements, we're proposing to
do all the frontage improvements. So,
there's work to 228th and 43rd. We've
submitted permits for both of those.
We're in process of getting those
permits as part of this construction.
We're proposing to do all the buffering
requirements that are in there. So the
we'll get to a couple of slides from
now, but there the site plan that showed
the phasing. Um there's a lot of white
areas around the outside. Those are all
the existing trees. We're not touching
them. So we didn't want to depict that
we were doing work in those areas, but
that that is part of phase 1A that we're
maintaining those buffers and all those
pieces. Um,
okay.
So, the first thing I wanted to talk
about was the trees. So, um, and this is
an image out of the public comments just
because it seemed like that was the the
best way to talk about this. Um, so in
two dimensions, you look at our site
plan and it seems like, hey, why don't
you just save the trees that are in the
elementary school area, save the trees
that are in the future baseball fields
and and all those pieces. And I can
believe believe me when we got this I
had the same thought in two dimensions
it makes complete sense. The problem is
our site's not flat. So we have about 70
ft of elevation difference between 228th
and the top of the hill that we need to
make up. And then school site um
programming has a lot of really flat
surfaces. So baseball fields you can't
build monos slope they're flat. Football
field tracks all those pieces right. So
we start taking those things into
consideration and we need to move the
dirt. We need to put the dirt somewhere.
And our proposal from the beginning has
been we're going to keep as much of the
dirt as possible on this site. So if we
don't cut down the trees as part of this
phase,
we need to haul off 150,000 yards of
dirt. It's a really big number. It's
really hard to comprehend. So I'm going
to break that down just a little bit. So
if we So that's 7,500 trucks and
trailers coming in and out of the site
to be able to do that. So 7,500 trucks
leaving the site. So if we assume a
truck leaves the site every 10 10 trips
an hour, so which is really fast for
them loading, but to make the math easy,
that's what I used. Um, it would take us
18 weeks of truck traffic down 228th,
down 43rd to wherever we're taking that
dirt. And then there is the off-site
issues of, you know, where do we
actually put it? How do we get rid of
it? Um, all those things. So, from an
environmental standpoint, it makes more
sense to cut the trees down that were a
that were in the original approval, move
that dirt on site. The other half of
that is if we haul off all that dirt in
phase one A, in phase 1B when we build
the football field and in phase two when
we build the elementary school, we need
to haul in the same amount of dirt. So
we're from an environmental standpoint,
it makes more sense to do the earth work
on our site and that's why we proposed
removing the trees as part of this phase
1A.
to illustrate that a little bit.
So this is a cut and fill map of our
site. So the blue areas are where we're
filling. So kind of what you would
expect kind of the football field or not
the football the elementary school and
the outfield of the baseball field is
where we're filling and we're cutting
kind of from the center. So the site
kind of slopes off has a little ridge
that runs down it. So we're cutting kind
of from that center portion to create
these flat surfaces off to the side.
Next thing I wanted to talk about was
the phasing. So, um I think Emily did a
really good job of covering the colors
of it. The thing I wanted to point out
is the the 228th improvements are
definitely part of what we're doing at
the beginning. All the sepha mitigation
and things that we've proposed are
happening at the beginning of the
project. Um, there is some temporary
ponds and things that are being
constructed. And the only reason they're
temporary, so we could go put the vaults
and those pieces in right now, but until
you put the final surfacing on, you're
not able to adjust all those things to
final grade. You're going to have to
touch them again. So, from a cost
standpoint, it doesn't make sense to put
them underground and then have to touch
them again and spend more money on them.
In the documents, um, there's some
unfortunate wording on my part. Um, I
call them above ground ponds, and I
think you'll see that in some of the
public comments. Uh, they're not above
ground. They're open air, so it's a
regular storm pond like you would see
anywhere else in the city. Um, but
they're not above ground. It's just
unfortunate on my part. Um, so, so
they're sized to meet the detention
requirements for our site. All the all
the calculations and everything have
been submitted to the city of Isiqua and
we're working through the permit process
with them. um to ultimately get permits
to be able to do that. But we're in
conformance. We're treating all the
storm water leaving the site. Um all
those pieces as part of it. Um
the question about the the vaults
themselves, like the number of vaults,
so there's there's there's actually two
vaults in phase one A. So there's
there's a there's one right down by the
entryway and there's one under the
football field.
And then you have the sixA
there's there'll be three at the end of
phase 1 A and B. So the one under the
baseball field gets turned into a vault.
All the ones on the elementary school
stay where they were.
The next thing I want to talk about was
the floor area ratio. So my intent is
not for you to read all the tiny little
text I just put up here. So here's some
images out of the original AAS that was
approved to reduce our floor area. So as
you can see from the map, the the whole
site was counted as part of that
calculation. So we had to come up with
areas that were being used for different
things as part of the school program,
community uses, those pieces, the
building area against that. You can see
we don't get credit for things like the
parking garage and other pieces. So
there's a lot of this that is just not
colored. So anything that's not color,
we don't get credit for. And so
basically, you're taking the building
area, comparing it to that. The original
approval had the phasing included in it.
So we had the elementary school, all the
program for the elementary school
included in that calculation. So our
proposed revision to this to add an
additional phase doesn't change that
underlying approval. I'm sure you're
going to hear about that. I just wanted
to mention that that's um that was
previously phased and there's no change
to that as part of this amendment.
The final thing we wanted to talk about
was the facade changes and I'm probably
going to bring Kim up and I'm guessing
you need to swear her in.
>> Please state your name for the record.
>> I'm Kim Young. I'm an architect with
Betetti Architects. And do you swear by
oath or affirmation that the testimony
you were about to provide is true?
>> I do.
>> Thank you.
>> Um so as um Emily talked about earlier,
we do have some facade changes. Um the
first thing to know is that both phase 1
A and phase 1B are within the previously
approved footprint. So we're not
expanding or contracting the building at
all. It'll fit within the previous
footprint. Also, we're not proposing any
changes to materials. We are using the
same materials. We're using the same
patterning and proportions. The windows
to materials are the same. The big
change is that we have um you know,
again, as Emily mentioned, we have
programmatic changes on the interior of
the building. So, windows have adjusted
to work with those interior spaces. And
in fact, we have more windows now
because the west wing of the building
was primarily athletic facilities. So
the gymnasium, the auxiliary gymnasium,
those spaces don't typically have a lot
of windows. You don't want balls being
thrown at a glass, but now we have
learning spaces, so we were able to
increase the windows. Um, how do I
um so this was um this was the previous
um version of the facade. Um, so we just
wanted to share that with you and then
show you the current um updated
rendering. So you can see that the
proportions and the patterns are very
much the same as they were before. So
the big changes that we've made are we
did have to shift over the main entry.
It's still on the north facade like it
was previously, but it was part of what
is going to now be phase 1B. So we had
to move it over to phase 1 A. still has
a lot of glazing at the entry and big
canopy and that's um what you see in
this facade. The other thing we did was
um add on the south side of the building
a canopy and a fenced in area for an
outdoor kind of classroom workspace for
students that come off of some shops and
studio areas
on the east side of the building. You
didn't see that facade before of of this
phase because that was an interior wall.
That's now an exterior wall in the
temporary situation until the next phase
is built. And that um the commons and
cafeteria are on the other side of that.
So you'll see a lot of glazing there as
well as another canopy so students can
go out during lunchtime and have their
lunch. Um eventually that'll become an
interior wall and we'll just be a it's
built like an exterior wall, but we'll
be able to keep that in place.
Um then as also was previously
mentioned, we did move the loading dock
over to the west side of the building
and that's so it works with the new
program on the interior. So it's
connected to the kitchen to um uh
custodial loading and receiving as well
as other infrastructure spaces like
mechanical and electrical rooms. And
then finally the uh building height came
down a little bit in parts because we
didn't need the same volume for the
learning spaces that we had with the
gyms. So it came down a little bit. We
do still have mechanical equipment as
was mentioned with all the required
screening, but we have less mechanical
equipment on the roof now because we did
build an internal mechanical mezzanine
so we could put some of the equipment
there and then we also have screening
around the loading dock where we have
other pieces of equipment. So those are
all the major changes with the facade.
I think with that we're ready to answer
any questions you guys have.
>> Richard, do you want to continue?
>> Okay. Uh, I'll leave the other
questions. I think you already answered
them once I asked before. Regarding uh
the sheets A1 and A2, part of them are
marked revisions and part are marked
revisions too. Can you explain the
difference between that?
>> The sheets on the exhibits. Um it was
when they first submitted we had
comments for revisions that they need to
make to become code compliant. So when
it says revision one that's their first
resubmitt and then we had more comments
for more revisions for them to make. So
that was revision two.
>> Okay. So revision two is the version
that we are to the final version.
Correct.
>> Yeah. Thank you.
>> Any other commissioners? Mill. Um, are
you able to show us the garbage
enclosure, the new one versus the old
one? And looking what we have in the
package, it's kind of hard to see what
that would how that what that looks like
on the west side.
>> Do you have an easier way to do it?
>> Okay. Okay. I have all of our the
thousands of pages of stuff we
submitted. I just don't want everybody
to sit here and watch me flip through
it. Yeah.
>> Which is what Emily's doing. And it
would and looking at that what's on the
screen now it would be on the right
side. It would be
>> it is I I guess one thing since you're
bringing that up. So
if you go back to this image you can see
it on the right here. It looks really
prominent because we've stripped away
all the landscape features and
everything. So so that is that area.
When we go to that image at the end,
you can see we put trees and everything
around that area to to keep it from
being visible.
You want me to stop?
>> And the reason for moving that from
where
>> the kitchen was previously on the other
side of the floor plan, so it was in the
phase 1B area. Obviously, we can't build
a school without a kitchen. So, we need
to find a new home for it. the way that
the site laid out with kind of the
center commons area, we it didn't make
sense to have it on that and then having
the loading dock as its own standalone
thing right now didn't make any sense.
So, moving it to the other side of the
building just seemed like it was the
right answer and works a lot better from
actually bringing trucks in and turning
them around and stuff
>> and the trucks will come from behind to
this from essentially from the south.
>> That's a good comment.
I just assume everybody's been staring
at this as long as I have. So, um, yeah.
So, from our site, you come up this
access road and then where it turns blue
here across. So, this will be bus and
service. So, the buses turn around,
park, and leave. So, that service area
ends up being right here. Now, it was
previously, you could see on this is an
old site plan, but it was previously
kind of this big turnaround thing. So,
you can imagine a truck trying to back
around this corner and down into that
loading dock. I assume you guys can see
my mouse. Okay. Um,
so trying to back down that corner was
going to be problematic. So, if we go to
the phasing plan,
the hatching doesn't help, but
Basically, it's it's this area is the
loading dock. So, the trucks will be
able to turn around and just back
straight into that area. So, a lot a lot
simpler.
>> Sorry. How did how do the trucks move in
and out there?
>> So, they're going to they're going to
pull forward and back straight in.
Then they'll have the option. We've run
turning movements where they can just
pull straight out this way or they can
come out, make the same loop the buses
make around this island at the top
>> and then come back down the hill. So all
that was plaza area before it's now
essentially kind of blocked off with the
loading dock.
>> Correct.
>> Okay. Thank you.
>> I don't think we gave you one.
>> I don't rendering of the enclosure. I
only have a site plan.
>> I think that answered my question.
It's all fenced off.
>> Yeah.
>> Probably worth noting. Um, so the
original approval, obviously we had the
elementary school as as part of that
approval. It had the loading dock right
out front of the elementary school. So
we've we've applied the same
requirements that we used for that and
the city's current code um for
screening,
but but that was part of the original
approval. The loading dock for the
elementary school, just for everybody's
reference, is this area kind of right
out in front of the elementary school.
Thank you.
Thank you, chair. Um,
I see on the sheets, I think it's sheet
C1 and probably others, there are
portables in a new high school. I was
wondering why. And do do they disappear
after 1A?
>> I would I would love to tell you that's
not that's within our control. So, it
turns out in the state of Washington, if
you do a building that has public
funding and you want any money from the
state whatsoever, you have to show
future portables.
So, it's it's a state requirement to to
get funding that we need to have a
location for those portables. The the
goal is obviously to have kids within
the building and all those pieces, but
you know, based on funding and things,
I'm not telling you they'll never be
there, but the goal is obvious to get
kids within the building.
>> Michael.
>> Yeah. So um you talked about with the
revised phasing for the project that
you'll sat the that the each phase will
satisfy the requirements landscaping
requirements uh drainage requirements
etc. So the question that's been rattled
around in my brain here is if you build
phase 1 A and then the project for
whatever reason doesn't move forward as
proposed here,
what happens to those areas that have
been disturbed with regard to the
requirements for landscaping, uh
planting of trees as part of the tree
preservation requirements, etc. What's
the plan? There's so there's a couple
ways I could probably tell you this, but
I'm going to tell you what kind of keeps
me up at night about that. So, the the
reality is we get temporary occupancy of
the building. We, you know, we're ready
to open the school, there's no funding
for the next phase, then we lose our
land use approval, right? Based on that
condition 11 that you were mentioning.
Um and we will be back in front of you
with a new proposal to do something
you've probably already reviewed um
within the phase 1B area. And it just
unfortunately the way the conditions are
written and not having the city not
having a master site plan approval
process that that spans large period of
time. So historically master site plans
are used for projects that take you know
20 years to build and unfortunately with
the changes to the code that doesn't
exist. So um we're kind of stuck with
what's there. So those those areas would
remain disturbed until the school
district came in with a new application
to go back through land use um get
approvals and build out the rest of
their project.
>> So maybe another kind of follow-up
question. So part of the elementary
school, there's condition back to
condition 11 that Commissioner Morgan
referenced. There's a requirement for if
the permits expire and that project
doesn't move forward and the and the
master site plan um expires, there's a
condition that uh requires that the
stockpile of fill is removed and
restoration the site occurs.
So
that part of the project has a condition
that says the district needs to come in
and do something to um modify the site
to for a longer term condition. We don't
have that condition as I can see on the
current permits. Um but
what you're saying is that it would stay
in its current form after phase 1A until
a future project moves forward. Um,
okay. That that answers
>> I guess maybe just a little bit of
history on that condition and how the
removal of stockpile became a thing. Um,
we did propose putting like stockpiling
material on that site and there will be
stock piles like throughout
construction. Like I'm sure you've all
seen somebody dig up areas. We have to
put the dirt somewhere while we build
whatever it is and we back to it. Right.
We're not proposing to stockpile dirt on
the elementary school site long term. So
like we took that as do not stockpile
dirt on that site if you're not going to
build it tomorrow because it would make
no sense for us to put it in a truck,
take it to the elementary school, dump
it, and then 6 months from now pay a
contractor to put it back in a truck and
take it somewhere else. So our intent is
the dirt that is above and beyond what
we need gets exported from the site at
that time. Um, and if you guys wanted to
add some type of condition that said we
can't stockpile in the phase 1B area, I
don't think we would have any concerns
with that.
>> Thank you. Um, can I follow up on that?
Um, if I understand this correctly,
condition 11 would still apply
and it says if the elementary school has
not been built, the stockpile shall be
removed, but we can ignore that because
there won't be one. and the site
restored and stabilized within 3 months
based on a removal plan approved by the
city. So, it would seem to me that that
still applies
that you would have to restore the site
within 3 months. It wouldn't just sit
waiting for another proposal.
>> Yeah. So, we I guess the the way we've
interpreted that and I think it was the
way it was intended based on a lot of
conversations before we got to that
condition. Um the the idea would be
restore to like subgrade conditions. So
there'd still be a building pad there
and then we would plant that area. So
we've talked about hydro seeding um and
and those pieces to make sure we don't
have erosion and other problems with
that area, but not I guess the res the
restore it's not like restore it to
previous conditions. We're back talking
and we're back talking about the amount
of dirt we'd have to haul off there,
right? that that was never the intent
and that's not the way we understood it.
>> Katie, I I just have a clarification
question on the same topic. Um, you
mentioned there'll be no stockpiling on
the say the elementary school site and I
I would guess that is that apply the
fields the baseball fields too. My my my
question is but does that
>> and maybe I just don't know the lingo
but you're going to regrade the site,
right? So are what is what's the
difference between the changing the
grading and that building pad and a
stockpile?
>> Yeah, that's great clarification. So
when I say no stockpiling, I mean we're
going to build it to subgrade. So we're
going to bring the elevation up to what
the future elevations need to be to
build on that site. So the stockpiling
would be us actually like creating a
mound of dirt covering with plastic or
hydro seating or whatever and you end up
with you know little mountain of dirt on
that site. That is not proposed. Does
that clarify?
>> The regrading would still happen to get
to that subgrade elevation. Correct.
And as I mentioned before we need to do
that to avoid hauling a whole bunch of
material and causing more traffic than I
want to be a part of.
John,
>> going back to um Commissioner Brennan's
comment or worst case scenario of 1A 1B
not following up. Um is the intent if
you have TCO to actually get an occup
occupancy permit and occupy the high
school if if 1B doesn't follow on?
>> Yeah. I mean, the reality is for the
school district, you're going to put the
amount of effort it's going to take to
get there. You're going to move into
that school and you're going to go back
through the process if if we can't get,
you know, the next building permit
because it's it's a little more
complicated than that. So, we need to
submit for the building permit and then
building permits are only good for a
certain amount of time, right? So,
there's got to be some fairly good idea
that we're going to move into that next
phase.
And then kind of pivoting a little bit
back to my question on on the
programming was I guess it sounds like
the programming changed significantly
enough to cause this phasing to occur
and could you describe it a bit?
>> Yeah, so there was a that wing, there
was gym, there was locker rooms, um
there was some classroom above it, but
but it was really those athletic uses
that were there. If you're going to
build part of a high school, probably
doesn't make sense to build the gym and
a locker room. Um so so those were moved
to the they're going to be moved to the
other wing. Um so basically we flipped
the building when we did that. You know
still needing to have the kitchen all
those pieces there necessitated moving
the loading dock closer to the kitchen
because that's really you know most your
deliveries and things that's where
they're going. Um so having that tied
together made a lot more sense.
>> So it wasn't an a projected enrollment
issue then. Thanks.
>> Any other commissioner questions?
>> All right. Thank you.
>> Thank you.
>> Now we'll move into the public comment
portion of the hearing. Miss Jackson,
has anyone signed up to comment on this
topic?
>> Yes, chair. They have.
>> All right. Those in who are in person
and signed up in advance to make
comments will be called on first. If you
are in the room and did not sign up, I
will ask for other speakers for closing
this portion of the meeting. If you are
joining us by computer or smartphone and
would like to make a comment, please
raise your virtual hand. This varies by
device. If you have questions, please
send the host a chat message or email
the staff at amanda jisiqua.gov.
For those making comments, please direct
your comments to the development
commission and not individuals. As a
reminder, this is not a conversation.
You may ask questions, but neither the
commission nor the applicant are able to
respond. For inerson attendees, please
step up to the lectern. For meeting
attendees p participating virtually,
when recognized, please unmute your
microphone.
When it's your turn to speak, state your
name, speak clearly and pause frequently
and limit your comments to 3 minutes. If
you are attending virtually and do not
respond after your name or phone number
is called or if your connection is lost
unexpectedly, the meeting need to
proceed. You are encouraged to rejoin
the meeting if able to do so. Personal
attacks, obscene language, derogatory
remarks, and disruptive behavior will
not be permitted. As a reminder, comment
should be focused on the proposed
amendments before the commission only.
Miss Jackson, please call our first
speaker,
>> Tim Brown.
One general comment.
>> I'm sorry. I want to get one general
comment first. We keep talking about
phase 1 A and 1B. They're only talking
about 1A here tonight. The chance of 1B
happening to me is improbable.
What encompassed 1 A and 1B was what the
two bond issues that failed. The last
one didn't even get 50% of the vote.
There's strong resistance in the iso
community to spend all the money on this
school.
I again I remind you to see see yourself
doing 1A 1B when they talk about being
temporary. Temporary could be forever.
Uh I have a different understanding in
some respects. I guess my time is up. Uh
I thought that uh I just would point out
that uh
>> your your time is not up.
I beg your pardon.
>> Your time's not up. They'll they'll fix
the clock.
>> They'll fix it.
>> What?
>> Your time is not up. They will fix the
clock.
>> Oh, okay. Okay. I wonder how I lost a
minute and a half. Yeah. Uh I think the
ISD talks about installing temporary
above ground detention ponds
uh and later constructing full storm
water compliance as they say that comply
with professional standards. These do
not fully comply with professional
standards. Uh the one the original plan
was have major underground vaulting
underneath the stadium with two small
ponds. We've now flipped it and we've
got something where we're going to have
major uh above ground water. Then I'll
point out that they did this ISD have a
geothermal injury report in 61721
prepared by associate earth sciences. I
quote due to the lack of on-site
receptor style on-site storm water
filtration is not recommended not is put
in caps by them.
uh the reissued SEPA sea of the MDNS
September 9th 2021 I quote again note
that on-site soil are not suitable for
infiltration
uh
the other question when you actually
look at that property it's on the top of
a hill drainage both sides this is not
the city of Seamish but the bulk of the
at least 40% of the rainwater is going
to go into Seamish is a very steep hill
right off of 228th is basically a road
cut of the top of a ridge. The water
goes directly into Laughing Jacobs Creek
and in Seamish. Seamish has not been
contacted by SSD. They talked about how
important it is because they're talking
about major major changes in the
roadway, but they're not propo including
that in this proposal.
Uh there's a I have people I know have
spoke to members of the city council of
of Seamish and they are a gasast at this
thought. Uh
uh
the city also again the city of Isiqua's
code they say it complies with
>> your time is up now. Do you have one
last thought?
>> I have one last said all storm water
retention treatment must be provided
above in below ground vaults. That's
isqua co. Thank you.
>> Um, our countdown clock isn't working,
so we will just give you a two minutes
left, one minute left warning.
>> Dave Osmer.
Good evening, members of the commission.
My name is Dave Osmer. I reside in
Providence Point.
Uh I clearly understand that safety is a
significant concern of the school
district. However, this high school, if
built as planned, would be would have
only one uh single open exit. That would
be the only one in the district that has
it that way in case of an emergency, a
potential safety nightmare. The staff
report for this project in section 4
approved land use permit. The fourth
paragraph states that this amendment
includes quote minor improvements to
provide emergencyonly access at
Providence Heights Loop. There is just
one problem with this statement that has
not been addressed anywhere in this
amendment or in the original
application.
I call your attention to cont condition
number 79 in the document sea land use
conditions matrix which states the
design includes an emergency access off
of 228 over an existing private road
that is separate from the main access
but provides full access through the
site via internal driveways and fire
lane. The entrance from the private road
into the site will be secured with a
gate with emergency responders having
keyed access through the emergency
access gate.
If acceptable, and I continue to quote,
if acceptable to others having rights to
use the private road, the entrance to
that private road off 2028 or 228th will
be secured with by a gate with locked
key access available to emergency
responders and others having rights to
use the private road.
The issue is that the plan all of the
plan sites we've reviewed for this
project show that Providence Point
property line runs down the middle of
this private road.
Years ago, there was an easement on this
road allowing for both neighbor prop
both neighboring property owners to use
it. However, ISD claims that such an
easement has been vacated and our
searches of county property records
reveal no evidence that it still exists,
thus precluding its use by ISD without
permission from Providence Point. To
date, no one from ISD or the city of
Isiqua has contacted Providence Point
leadership to resolve this matter, nor
has leadership given ISD permission to
use what we believe is Provenence
Point's half of the road. Additionally,
ISD has not provided any survey
proving otherwise. Therefore, it is not
appropriate for this commission to act
on this uh amendment
>> three minutes
>> without until that uh this issue has
been satisfactorily resolved. Thank you.
>> Thank you.
>> J Sternoff.
My name is Jace Turnoff and I also
reside in Providence Point
adjacent to the Providence Heights
property. As you all are aware, uh at
the end of uh the uh first approval in
2022, there were approximately 58
conditions on the property. Since then,
as of June of this year, it's now 82,
which a lot of you have been referencing
tonight. Uh and it keeps getting added
every time uh we review it.
the the February 16 22 uh staff report
for the project uh land use examines the
in
isqua municipal code title 16 and 18.
They were vested at the time of the land
use application to which the major
amendment must legally adhere. The land
use elements regulated under the code
included project clearing, grading,
storm water management and roadway
improvements. According to the ITPA uh
municipal code 1626 and 1810, the
applicant must obtain initial site work
permits for both on-site and off-site
improvements within the jurisdictions of
the city of Isiqua and the cities of
Seamish. Both jurisdictions require
detention facilities and flow control
structures to detain and release storm
waters at rates equal to or less than
50% of the 2-year peak flow.
At last check, the city of Seamish
checking with the city council as well
as her plan planning department, there
has been no communication by the city of
Isiqua or the Isiqua school district
with the city of Seamish in reference to
this.
The storm water the first requirement is
to install underground uh groundwater
storage. Uh they are adding uh more open
open uh
>> two minutes.
>> Thank you. Two remaining or you're at 2
minutes.
>> Okay.
>> You're at 2 minutes. 2 minutes and 13
seconds.
>> Okay. So what I'd guess I'd like to move
on to my conclusion.
As I discussed previously about
stormliner management and road
improvements are both necessary and
integral parts of the clearing and
grading and must be completed
simultaneously with the work. Clearing
and grading without installing
infrastructure is not allowed. The major
amendment intends a separate clearing
and grading from the required
infrastructure completion. However,
Isqua's code and land use conditions for
the uh project do not uh permit this.
The second uh dis
part I would like to talk about is the
uh
vesting and uh the vesting uh goes back
to the 22 uh approval as well as the
vesting uh how this committee deals with
>> three minutes sir.
>> Pardon
>> you have there you are at three minutes
and 14 seconds.
>> Okay. In conclusion, what I'd like to
say be because of the vesting also deals
with uh
the uh
I'm trying to condense this because the
vesting deals specifically with uh how
the city of Isiqua deals with the
appeals. As you recall, in 2022, it was
considered a level five. And on July 1st
of this year, it was changed to a level
four, which is only the development
commission and doesn't go to this city
council. Coincidentally, when it changed
on July 1st, that was the day that the
amendment was uh to the master site plan
was proposed. And what I'm trying to ask
you to uh consider also is that not only
you recommend this, but you review this
with the city council since that's was
vested back in 2022. Thank you.
>> Thank you,
>> Rick Arbor
virtual.
>> Uh yes, I'm here. Can you hear me?
>> Yes, we can hear you. You can begin.
>> Okay. I guess I'm not on the the video
part of this, but uh um so um I'm
Richard Amber. I represent the
Providence Point um umbrella board uh
with regard to this matter. We've um
provided uh the development commission
with a letter dated August 21 uh which
is very detailed and addresses the
issues that are involved here. I won't
go through that letter again in detail
because I know development commission
members have have read it. But I will um
highlight several issues that have um
been developed tonight. Number one, this
the storm drainage plan is different
than what was originally proposed. It it
calls for open um open areas for storm
detention. many of those storm detention
areas uh will flow into Providence Point
and th this is entirely new storm
drainage system that hasn't been u
analyzed and and discussed before. Um
there needs to be a complete plan for
drainage because all the water in these
ponds will tend to flow out because it
will not infiltrate uh into the ground.
So that is a major defect with this um
project. Um secondly, the um the 1A um
1B distinction um does not recognize two
fundamental facts. Number one, there is
no funding for phase 1B at all. As as
identified, the the funding for that
project was rejected by the voters.
Secondly, and as indicated in my letter,
there is no basis in the city of the
Isiqua capital facilities plan for phase
1B because there is not the enrollment
projections to support. Uh the
development commission needs to look at
this project as one that will only
include phase 1B.
>> You have one minute.
Phase 1B will not be happening and
cannot be indicated as a um as a future
project. Um and I've indicated the
importance that the city has over in its
planning for the retention of forests
areas trees in the community. It is a
very important issue to the city and yet
the Isakqua school district uh setting
in my opinion a bad example for its
students uh intends to mow down trees as
a place to um place soil. That's that's
not an appropriate thing to do. There's
other ways to deal with the soils that
are there. um if indeed there is going
to be a phase 1B uh which which seems to
me to be entirely unwritten. So um I
have my letter in front of you um and um
if you have questions for me I'm happy
to answer them. I think I'm right about
>> Yes sir you are. Thank you.
Marne
Maldono.
Telephone number 4252203389.
First name Marne.
I do have you unmuted.
Thank you. Good evening, development
commissioners. Thank you for the
opportunity to speak this evening. I'm
Marne Moralda. I serve as an elected
school director for the past 16 years
and I'm currently the Isiqua school
board president. I'm here to express our
support for the proposed amendment in to
the previously approved land use permit
for the new high school. I truly
appreciate the time and diligence that
this commission takes to protect our
community while at the same time
planning for growth. In 2015, 10 years
ago, the Isiqua School District held a
bond committee made up of staff,
community members, parents, and
students. Based on the enroll enrollment
at the time and growth determined by the
continued development within the Isiqua
school district boundaries, it was
determined that a fourth comprehensive
high school would be needed. Our board
is focusing focusing on providing a
world-class education for our students
to prepare them to thrive throughout
their life. We feel that each student
should be known by name, strength, and
need, and our overcrowded schools create
barriers for our students to achieve
their full potential. Nearly a decade of
illegal battles delayed this project to
the point that the entire phase 1
project could not be completed. But the
number of high school students to today
is significantly more than in 2015 when
we first determined the need. Even
future predicted declines do not expect
the loss of high school students to
levels lower than at that time. And as
the development commission knows, land
has been reszoned for residential units
throughout the city, meaning that with
more affordable options, more families
will be moving into the Isakqua School
District. Further delays on this project
does not remove the need. It only
increases the cost. In exhibit one, our
letter affirms that our position remains
consistent and clear. This project was
funded by voters, has undergone multiple
legal reviews, and has been vetted
several times by committees and
councils. In exhibit two, our new high
school project timeline shows more than
a decade of work. As event uh as as
evident in the timeline, our district
has repeatedly met with all parties
without hesitation in good faith to
discuss issues and accommodate concerns.
In exhibit three, a proposed 2020
agreement was negotiated leadership
>> of our former superintendent with select
members of the Providence point and I
was part of those discussions.
Unfortunately, the PPUA leadership never
signed the agreement, but it
demonstrated how far the district was
willing to address their concerns,
including buffers, enhancing landscape,
athletic fields, lighting, noise,
traffic, construction, hour limitations,
and more. In exhibit 4, our team
continued working with city officials
and select Proven Point community
members to develop a comprehensive list
of accommodations at an estimate of cost
of nearly $16 million.
While not necessarily required by code,
we provided these voluntary investments
in an effort to be a good neighbor. For
more than a decade, this project has
been shaped by adult disagreements. Some
opponents have indicated they will try
to link this project to dissuade the
community to vote for upcoming levies,
even though the levies are unrelated to
funding construction of the new high
school. Meanwhile, students continue to
attend overcrowded high schools and
future students will inherent the
consequences if we continue to delay.
>> You are at the 3inut payers more. I urge
the commission to approve the amendment
as presented.
>> Thank you.
>> Carol Smith.
>> Good evening. I'm Carol Schmidt, high
school history teacher, Belleview High,
and Providence Point resident.
Thank you for giving me this
opportunity. Many in the Providence
Point community have written and spoken
to this commission, the city council,
the Isqua School District about the
impact the school would have on our
community, the environment, and traffic.
It hasn't seemed to matter. We have had
little recourse other than our vote.
I'm convinced we made a difference in
the results of the recent bond and levy
defeats. It hurts me to say that because
I am a teacher. I understand
overcrowding. One of my classes has 37
kids in a room that comfortably seats
32. And as have I said before, Belleview
High was built on the top of a hill with
two major entrances, two minor
entrances, and yet an hour after school
gets out, I still can't get out of the
parking lot because the parents are
backed up all the way to Belleview Way.
It won't be any different here.
The current plan for high school number
four is only one major entrance.
I am primarily here today because in the
five years of my residency in Isiqua and
taking part in this discussion on the
school, I haven't seen a good survey
study as to where these kids are.
Shouldn't this guide the construction of
the new school? Are they in Newcastle?
Because they're busy trying to get into
Newport High. Are they in May Valley,
the Highlands, or off of Fall City Road?
They're not in my neighborhood. Any
students from these areas would just add
to the traffic issues that they have to
travel to the Providence Point location.
There are very few students in our
immediate area. And I want to refute
what one recent candidate for office
said to our community. She told us that
a neighborhood schools are great for
property values. We are a 55 and over
community. Our property values will not
go up because the school is in our
neighborhood. We don't sell our homes to
young families. Who will I sell my unit
to when it looks at a black top or a big
mountain of dirt uh instead of the sound
of frogs and trees? Now, you can
continue to ignore our entire community
of voters and still approve this
revision. I can't remain
>> the school district can begin building
this school and then at some point in
the future, it's going to need money for
this 1B. How do you expect us to vote?
Please set up a commission to study
where the kids are. What was once a
cheap acquisition of land has to be
costing everyone a lot more time and tax
dollars. Thank you.
>> Thank you.
>> Erica Stevens.
Hi, my name is Erica Stevens. Uh, I
guess I don't have to tell you why we're
here. In 2016, 71.4%
of voters approved a bond measure to,
among other things, build a fourth
comprehensive high school. Following the
identification, acquisition and
acquisition of suitable site, the
district spent years in a legal battle
over this site. During that time, costs
increase, as costs tend to do, and with
years of delays, the original estimates
and original funds earmarked for this
project are not sufficient. Had the
building opened in 2023 as planned, we
wouldn't be here tonight because it'd be
open. Yet, here we are. For context, I
have served on Isiqua School District's
bond advisory committee in 2011,
again in 2015 for the 2016 bond and levy
advisory committees in 2021 and 2025. I
am currently serving on the capital
projects oversight committee. I have two
children, one graduated from Isiqua High
School in 2024, a year after the new
high school should have opened, and one
is a sophomore at Isakiqua. Who knows if
she would have been at IHS or the new
school as our family is nearly
equidistant from Isiziqua High School
skyline and the new site.
Isiziqua was built wasn't built for 2500
students. In fact, in 2016 when the bond
passed, IHS had only 2,200 students. It
has increased by 14% in that time. Some
might question why build a new high
school if you can't build a full
comprehensive high school. Tell that to
my daughter who's been on crutches for
the last 6 weeks and has to go out to
the portables in the rain. If you're not
familiar with Isiqua High School, the
portables are on the other side of the
sports fields.
These classrooms are on the edge of
campus just past the trail head to Poo
Poo Point.
>> You have one minute.
>> Approximately 650 ft, the length of two
football fields from the main building.
Tell that to kids who eat lunch in their
cars rather than sitting on the floor in
the lunchroom because there's not enough
room in the commons. That was my son.
Tell that to kids who are trying to
navigate crowded halls and get to class
on time. My daughter has to be excused
early from Spanish just so that she can
get from the portables back to the main
building to her next class on time. In
the same way that the city of Isiziqua
wants to be a good steward of taxpayer
money, ISD has the same obligation. and
it's one the district takes seriously.
This is part of the reason for
establishing the capital projects
oversight committee. It provides another
set of eyes on these projects and the
spending. We, the school district, the
city of Isiqua, and the broader
community have been talking about this
project with this piece of land for at
least eight years. There's not another
parcel of suitable land within the urban
growth area. Please keep in mind that
your actions, your decisions affect more
than just the city of Isiqua. They
affect everyone who lives in the Isiqua
school district.
>> Three minutes.
>> After eight years of discussion,
applications, studies, etc. I urge you
to approve the amendment to the existing
permit. Thank you.
>> Thank you,
>> Rory Crest.
Good evening. My name is Roy Crest. I
live at 18712 Southeast 44th Street,
Isiqua.
My relationship to the city is as a
property owner and resident. Uh I was
raised in the Isiqua community and
attended Isiqua Schools and graduated
from Isqua High School in 1974.
My my wife and I bought our first home
in Isiqua in 1984. We raised our family
in Isiqua and our two children attended
Isqua schools from kindergarten to
graduating from Isqua High School. I now
have a granddaughter who attends Sunset
Elementary.
I want to express my gratitude to the
many residents of Isiqua who over the
years have supported the Isqua school
district. The greater Isiqua community
and Isqua School District have been the
reason why this is such a desirable
place to live. People have always
recognized that good schools are a key
element to a good community.
Everyone who lives here now benefits
from the commitment of past residents,
homeowners, and business owners.
In recent years, there seems to be a
group of individuals who appear opposed
to anything related to school funding or
improvement.
And I find that frustrating, as I know
many others. Also,
the community approved the funding of a
new high school and elementary school
and has met roadblock after roadblock
from an anti-school group.
It's time to let the district move ahead
and build the new school,
even in its scaled down size because of
all the delays caused by this
anti-schools group.
Those of us who have lived here for many
years, even decades,
want our Isquas community and schools to
be as good for our current and future
residents and students as it has been
for us.
>> Thank you,
>> chair. That is all the people that have
signed up both virtually and online. But
there is someone online that has a
comment that has not signed up.
>> Okay.
>> Right. Null.
There we go. I think you can hear me
now.
>> Yes.
>> Thank you. My name is Wright Null. I uh
own a business that is for approximately
20 years uh in Isqua, Carson Null Law
Firm. Uh I have five kids, all of which
have gone through the Isqua School
District. Um, and I think there's a
couple things that are least important
to me as as I think about this. One is
um what what this hearing is about is
whether it complies with the code. And
I've just been completely impressed with
what the school has done in looking at
trying to limit the the damage um
environmental impact uh looking at the
number of trips that would have to be
taken by trucks uh and minimizing the
flow of traffic that's going to go by
Providence Point in that process. So I I
really think the school district
deserves some credit for what it's done.
Also, as I read
those plans uh relating to water runoff,
it seems to me that the water runoff has
not changed. It's still going in the
same place. And the
um underground storage versus the above
ground, not above ground, but the ponds
has not changed the flow of water. Um
and so that seems to be uh kind of a red
herring in this. The other red herring I
think that's important to recognize is
that the vote that they're talking about
that voted against the school that is
that is not um
a good read of that vote. The people
that are now saying well the opposition
to the last bond actively campaigned for
a smaller high school and said that this
the other high school the high school
that was planned was too big that they
would be for a smaller high school. And
so a no vote very well could be and
seems to have been a vote for this
smaller high school. Uh and so it's a
bit frustrating that campaign against
the bond for a smaller high school than
they have a smaller high school and
they're saying the bond was something
different than the voting was something
different. So uh I appreciate what the
school district has done.
>> Thank you for the time and effort you
guys have put in. Uh, and I'd encourage
you to to approve the plan and let this
move forward. Thank you.
>> Thank you.
>> We are done with virtual comments. Is
there anyone else present who would like
to speak?
All right. Thank you.
Does the applicant have any rebuttal to
the comments?
Thank you for the opportunity. I assume
I'm still sworn in.
>> Yes.
>> Thank you. Um, so a lot of things from
the neighbors and I'm going to bring the
district up to talk about like the
funding and enrollments and those pieces
here in a second. Um, but I wanted to
cover a couple other pieces. So, uh, it
was mentioned that we're not
infiltrating groundwater or infiltrating
storm water. Um, and the geotech report
says it's not going to infiltrate. It's
never been our proposal. We're detaining
storm water and releasing it with at the
historic conditions. Okay. So, we're
taking it back to for or back to
forested conditions. That includes the
portion of the site that was already
developed. So, there used to be a church
on the site. There's a huge parking lot
up at the top of the hill. All that area
goes back to forested conditions for our
pond sizing.
Um the next thing I want to talk about
the um EVA access um and us needing to
work through that process. So so the the
easement was created in 1979.
Um the property has underwent a number
of changes. So actually the church at
one time owned part of the Providence
Point area like part of their
subdivision. So that road was internal
to them as they started selling pieces
that changed. They had three different
deeds throughout 1979 where they made
changes to that. Turns out at that time
we didn't have real great recordkeeping
and so they relinquished part of and
intended to bring them back and the
title is not super clear. So what we
believe is that the intent was to keep
the 30-foot easement for both parties.
So the school district has rights to
that road. Providence Point has rights
to that road. Um, we've submitted a
memo. It's in the record from the
original time this came up. Um, that
that outlines that, but um,
the city staff has agreed with us um, as
part of the original permit application
back in 2022. Um, the next part, the the
clear and grade plans. There was a
comment about the clear and grade plans
needing to have you couldn't just do
clearing grading without anything else.
So, um, so we we did submit a clearing
grade permit that included the storm
water improvements. So, we've broken our
project from if we get into the phasing
portion. So, not trying to make this
super complicated, but from a
construction standpoint, we have phasing
within that of we're going to have a
site development permit. So, we have two
site development permits. one that
allows us to do the clearing, the
grading, storm water improvements, get
up to subgrade, and then we have a
second permit which has all the surface
features of asphalt, sidewalks, all
those pieces. And we separated those
apart so that five years ago, four years
ago, we could get ahead of that process,
pull permits, and start moving dirt. If
we would have known how this was going
to go, we probably would have combined
those. But this point we have two
permits and that's that's what we're
moving forward with. Um our intent is to
build storm water improvements as we're
moving dirt. So we have two requirements
for storm water on this site. We
obviously have the the ultimate one you
guys have seen plans for of you know
we're building underground vaults. We're
doing um temporary ponds. We're doing
ponds on the elementary school site. The
um the second part of that is erosion
control. So as you move dirt, we have
the chance of sediment getting into
storm water, you know, running off site.
So we'll have temporary sediment ponds,
baker tanks, pumps, all those things to
collect the storm water, treat it prior
to discharge during construction, and
then as soon as areas are brought to
grade, we'll build the actual final
storm water facility. Um, so it's two
different requirements on that specific
issue that's part of the stormwater
code. I just wanted to mention that we
are meeting both of them.
The final piece was the storm water
discharge. So, while we have temporary
ponds, um they're in the location of the
final facilities. So, there isn't a big
bait and switch of we had one thing and
we're going to something else. In the
original approval, we had a big
detention system under the baseball
field. We have a pond under the baseball
field. We had multiple facilities under
the elementary school. We still have
those facilities. We had a large
facility under the football field. Still
have that facility. Um the other thing
that should be noted is we're building
the discharge from those ultimate
systems as part of phase 1A. So all the
pipes under the road and things, those
temporary ponds are still discharging to
the ultimate location.
So we're we're still matching the basins
of the water that goes to Laughing
Jacob's Creek. Still going to Laughing
Jacob's Creek. The water that goes out
to 43rd still goes out to 43rd. They're
in the existing condition. There's some
water that naturally went to Providence
Point. Based on discussions the first
time around their downstream and the
43rd downstream come back together
within a quarter mile. They're
considered one basin and it was
determined that it was better to take
the water down 43rd and around
Providence Point instead of through
their site based on the number of
comments we got. So we are still
proposing to do that. So the air the
water from the elementary school that
was proposed to go down 43rd in the
original approval that's still
happening. So we have a very deep pipe
that runs all the way out to 43rd and
then down 43rd as part of our proposal.
I think you have to talk before they can
ask me questions. So
>> I'm going to turn it over to Martin with
the school district.
>> Okay.
I'm just not familiar. Do I need to?
>> Yeah.
>> Please state your name for the record.
>> Yep. My name is Martin Turney. I'm a
chief of finance and operations for the
school district.
>> Do you swear by oath or affirmation that
the testimony you're about to provide is
true?
>> I do.
>> Proceed.
>> Thank you. So, a couple things that came
up. I wanted to start with um funding
since that's um often a topic uh that's
of importance. I I want to point out
first too that this community voted
twice. once in 2016 and then in 2022 to
provide the needed funding for this high
school. Um, and due to the length of
time it's taken to get this done over
time, obviously escalating costs have
been tremendous. So, we have been trying
to keep, you know, keep up with those
escalating costs. It's really become an
obstacle for us obviously. Uh, and that
plays into the phasing, right? So, we
have students, we know where they are.
They are at Skyline and they're at Isqua
High School and those buildings are over
capacity by quite a bit. Uh our goal is
not to have just enough so that we can
bring kids in from portables. It's to
make sure that we have enough capacity
to do not just uh what we uh have
typically done but have innovative
spaces and be able to move into the
future with adequate uh programming. So,
um, you know, financially, we want to go
forward and get this phase done so we
can begin to have, um, momentum toward a
a larger high school out there. Um, and
we know that even if we're going to see
some softening in high school enrollment
in the near future, we know that growth
uh is on the horizon um, a little
further out. And in the meantime, as was
pointed out by uh director Moraldo, um
those numbers are not projected to go
down to a to a level um that would mean
that we would have adequate capacity for
how we want to serve our students. So,
thank you.
>> Thank you.
>> Does staff have any rebuttal to the
comments?
Um, not specific rebuttal to the
comments, but just in general reminder
about what we are focused on here
tonight. Um, a lot of comments that
we've heard and discussions that we've
had have veered into many different
topics, but tonight we are here to
decide on if the amendment complies with
code, and if the proposed amendments
should be approved. So those amendments
are splitting phase one into phase 1 A
and B, the revisions to the building
which is phase 1 A, the facade, entry,
loading, dock, trash, enclosure,
relocation, and the associated site
changes like parking, landscaping, site
infrastructure. That is the focus of
what the approval or um conditional
approval or denial is on tonight is the
requested amendments.
Thank you. Commissioners, are there any
objections to closing the public
hearing?
Hearing no objections, I now close the
public hearing at 8:10 p.m.
It's now time to move into the
deliberation portion of the meeting. But
first, we need to make a motion. Is
there a motion on the item before the
commission?
Michael.
>> Thank you, chair. I move the development
commission approve the major amendments
to the site development permit and
master site plan known as Isizakquai
school number four and elementary school
number 17 MPa25-00003
as described and evaluated in the staff
report dated November 4th, 2025 and
exhibits 1 through13 subject to the
conditions therein and as amended
tonight. And I move that the development
commission direct the community planning
and development department to prepare
findings of fact and conclusions for
review and approval by the development
commission chairwoman affirming the
development commission's decision to
approve the major amendment to the site
development permit and master site plan
known as Isizakqua High School number
four and elementary school number 17
MSPA25-00003
as subject to to the conditions listed
in the staff report dated November 4th,
2025 with exhibits 1 through 13 subject
to conditions therein and as amended
tonight.
>> Second.
>> Thank you. And now is there uh
commission discussion or any amendments?
Michael,
>> I am still um kind of pondering the
uh
condition where a permit expiration
occurs where we have um you know mass
clearing and grading and um removal of
significant trees on the site and
condition under the master development
per u plan to uh replace a significant
number of those trees. If the permit
expires in phase 1B and the elementary
school don't proceed, how is the commit
how is the is the condition remedied
with respect to that permit condition
meaning planting of the additional trees
to offset those that were removed during
the mass clearing. So, I'm still a bit
um perplexed by how that occurs if we
have an expiration of the permit without
a condition that says some form of
restoration needs to happen if the
site's going to be um if mass clearing
and grading happens at the beginning
here in phase 1 A for the entire
project.
Okay. Just making sure there was
anything you wanted to add. Um the
planting is happening within phase 1 A
of the trees. Was that the the
>> right so
>> central part of your question?
>> Yes. So for phase 1 a all of the
required replacement trees the 900 I
believe 900 trees that were going to be
planted as part of the offset for those
significant trees that are being removed
would be planted as part of one a
>> yes
>> from my memory of the landscape plan.
Yes.
Oh, yes.
>> We'll we'll share the podium to answer.
>> Yeah. So, the majority of the trees will
be planted in phase 1A because because
we're, you know, doing those areas
around the outside. There's some trees
within the elementary school site along
their frontage that will not be built,
but it's less than 5% of what we're
proposed to to put back on that area.
So, the majority of the trees will be
planted in phase 1 A.
>> Can we see the planting plan for 1A?
>> Yes. Give me a second to pull it up if
there's another question while I'm
pulling that up. I
>> just another Oh, go ahead if you want.
>> I just had a clarification on that
question. Um, but that would not return
the
elementary school and the baseball field
sites to its original condition even if
you included the subgraing stuff. You
mentioned before that it would be you
hydro seedated or something.
>> Yeah. Or it'll be likely hydro seated um
and stabilized from an erosion control
standpoint. Um but yeah, not not
replanting it with trees that we're
going to have to get a permit to cut
down to build the elementary school.
>> So, another somewhat related question.
So, the storm water
um system that's being developed as part
of phase 1A that that's I just want to
affirm to confirm this that that will
satisfy all of the the code requirements
for um water quality detention
um and discharge etc. And if it had to
exist for years beyond what's
anticipated here, um if this went ahead,
as the school district hopes it does
with phase one be proceeding, it would
still satisfy those requirements. It's
not a temporary condition. It's it would
meet the permanent condition of of water
quality and detention.
>> Yeah, it that's 100% correct. There's
nine minimum requirements for storm
water that we need to meet as part of
that manual. So, our proposal meets all
nine. I'm not going to bore you with
going through them all. Obviously, water
quality and flow control are kind of the
two big ones. Um and and so we're
meeting both those ponds will function.
The city's, I'm sure, going to require
us to put um agreements in place to make
sure they're being maintained and all
those things and um inspected on a
yearly basis and all the things you'd
have with a permanent system. So, that
will happen as part of the project.
>> Yeah. Would you explain flow control and
forest and condition? I want to make
sure everybody understands that.
>> Yeah. So, um, probably the easiest way
to describe this is if you if you So, we
have an allowed release rate. So, we if
you had the amount of water that comes
off a site um in a forested condition
and then you took that and compared that
to um a parking lot. Okay? you're going
to have a lot more water running off
from the parking lot condition because
you don't have the ground taking soils,
you don't have the trees taking up so up
the water, all those pieces, right? So,
the way the storm rider manual is set up
and so we run a somewhat complicated
model um that's called western
Washington hydraulic model. And so, what
we do is we say, okay, we're allowed to
release at this rate, right? And so, for
us, there's a whole bunch of different
ways to get there, but for our site,
we're going back to forested. So as soon
as we disturb the parking lot that I was
telling you was there, we're required to
take it back to forested conditions. So
we come up with a release rate from our
site based on that and then we put build
a bucket to take all the water that's
coming that's above that, right? And
we're metering out of that bucket. So if
you take a garden hose out of a bucket
and let the river run into it, that's
kind of what we're doing. And then you
size the bucket big enough to take your
storm event. So, we're running up to,
you know, a 100red-year storm event,
holding it on site and releasing it at a
slower rate. It's a little more
complicated than that because you can
imagine as it rains harder, you're
discharging more water. So, there's a
whole bunch of orififices and things in
there that we're doing to release at
different rates, but it's really trying
to mimic what's happening in the
existing condition. Um, that make sense?
>> Yep.
>> Thank you.
Um, as far as the trees, apologies,
Commissioner Brennan, I misremembered
the landscape. So, they're not planting
all the trees, but all the trees that
are required to meet code. So, um,
there's the landscaping and the tree uh,
retention and tree density meets code at
the end of phase 1 A, even if they're
not planting all the planned trees as
part of phase 1 A. Um, because as the
applicant stated, some will be planted
as part of the elementary school. And
you can see on the phasing plan here,
>> Richard,
>> still on the storm water. Before we get
too far away from that, I'm still having
trouble with this uh seat condition 14.
It says to comply with city of Esqua
code requirements to maximize usable
areas of the site. All storm water
detention and treatment will be provided
below ground in vaults, tanks, and other
proprietary systems. and in the SEIPA
matrix that's marked yes for phase 1A. I
wonder how do you see that those two
being consistent? Uh does it have to do
with the proprietary systems in phase 1
A would satisfy that and that's why it's
marked yes for phase 1 A?
>> No. And so in my my opinion so we're
trying to maximize usable space, right?
So, if we're not using that space,
providing an above ground system still
meets that, not above ground, I'm going
to stop using that word. An open air
storm water system um meets meets the
intent of that. So, we're not taking
area. We would love to put it
underground and build the baseball field
as you heard Martin talk about, but but
just costwise, it doesn't make sense to
do that for something we're not going to
build right now. So that that's our
intent is that um we've met that because
we're not actually building over that
area. Longterm we will phase 1B that's
the intent. Put it underground and do
that. The original plans had um the same
condition on the um
elementary school. We had ponds proposed
there um and and they were agreed to as
part of the original piece. So I don't
think that's inconsistent with the
recommendations of staff.
>> Okay. And before you go away, um there
were concerns expressed regarding
communication with city of Seamish
regarding the requirements in that area.
And I think that staff report and
possibly the project overview said that
negotiations were underway with city of
Seamish regarding this project. Could
you clarify that a little bit? what's
what's going on behind the scenes that
we are not aware of?
>> Absolutely. Yeah. So, um our frontage is
in d our traffic goes to 228th. The
easement or the city boundary is our
property line along that area. So, our
improvements in 228th need approval from
the city of Isiqua. We've been through
three rounds of comment revisions with
the city of Isiziqua. They've commented
on um storm water traffic turning
movements, queuing lengths, um discharge
of water. There's an existing, it was
mentioned that the water runs kind of
we're going to discharge the water and
it's going to run down the hill. So,
there's an existing ditch on the other
side that runs kind of through some
neighborhoods and down and ultimately
goes to Lapping Jacobs Creek. So, they
had improvements they wanted to that. Um
but we've been through three rounds of
um review comments with them. And we've
had multiple meetings with them over the
last two or three years to to get
through that process.
>> That's with city of Seamish.
>> Yes.
>> Okay.
>> Katie.
>> Yeah. Because I'm sorry, but if I heard
that, you were saying city of Isiziqua.
>> Sorry.
>> We have a very Yeah,
>> this the city boundaries are like super
complicated for where they are. So the
we do have frontage improvements in
Isiqua. We've been through a similar
process with the Isle part. Um but we
we've submitted for both permits. from
this standpoint, we've submitted for
every permit needed on our site. So,
sewer and water and all that wonderful
stuff.
>> Thank you,
>> Katie.
>> Um, so just to get back to I I guess
this uh condition 11 and you know what
happens to the baseball field site and
the elementary school site. Um, so I'm
just, you know, it says if if one, so if
one B 1B doesn't get funded and doesn't,
there's no permit for it. My
understanding is then that the
elementary school site would likely be
stabilized, right? So everything will be
stabilized. Um, uh, Geotech will be
taken care of and hydro seated probably.
And then there'll be an open air pond on
the baseball field site
>> and the outside of that would all be
hydro seated like same condition like
all the all the areas we're not building
on are going to be hydro seated or um
stabilized in some way.
>> So um and that'll happen you know within
and then that'll be finished um whatever
is not done now would be finished within
three months of knowing that we there's
no per additional permit coming. And I'm
wondering would is this sound like the
type of plan that would be approved by
the city and why there's no plan for it
>> because it so the condition 11 says um
you know blah blah blah stockpile shall
be on roof site restored and stabilized
based on a removal plan approved by the
city. It sounds like you're stating a
removal plan here, but there is no real
removal plan. So, we don't know what
would be
>> The condition was written because I
literally drew a plan where we were
going to stockpile a whole bunch of dirt
on the elementary school site as a cost
savings measure. Like, to be perfectly
honest, that's how we got here um or
there. Um so, we're not proposing to do
that. We're we're not going to have haul
off at the end. There was just a concern
that we were going to use that dirt in a
future phase, so we're going to
stockpile it. Um that's obviously not
the proposal now. So I don't think
>> so so this plan to finish to leave it
with the hydra seating and the open air
pond would be something that would be
approved.
>> Yeah. I the other piece with the the
three months like the reality is the
state of Washington department of
ecology has requirements of how long you
can leave a site unstabilized and not
work. It's significantly shorter than
three months even in the summer. So, um,
it will be stabilized long before that.
>> Would you pull condition 11 up on the
screen?
>> Seems like that's the one we keep
centering on. So, I want to look at it
and see if there's anything specific we
want to change.
>> And my question is more just with regard
to the phasing. If there's going to be a
phasing, then there's a chance that 1B
doesn't get done. Then then what is
there a plan that needs any sort of
approval or what happens? And 11, I'm
not sure if 11 means that there is or or
not.
>> Sure. I I guess yeah, city the question
is
if there is no 1B, is there anything
further needed from the district?
Is that what you're looking for?
>> Can I can
>> Yeah, it just says um the the site needs
to be and I understand with the history
of it needs to be put in some condition
that would be approved by the city. So
um we don't have in front of us what
that condition might be. So we we don't
know what the ultimate disposition of
the site might be if 1B is not approved.
>> Yeah. So, our proposal for 1A, so we've
submitted site development permits at
this point for those for that area. Um,
it has the plantings and things required
to meet. So the the parking lot area out
in front of the school that we're
building that eventually we end up
expanding the parking garage over that
whole hillside gets planted with code
required plantings to buffer the
above ground not above ground the
standard parking facilities.
So so we're we're meeting those
requirements. That's really temporary
landscaping that we're putting in to
meet the city's code. So, we can tell
you that we're meeting current code.
It's money we're spending to to make
sure we're meeting current code right
now that will get at some point taken
out when that area gets expanded. Um,
and then the baseball field, we show
hydro seating across that area um as
part of it. There's an access road um
existing on the site that goes through
the buffer area that we agreed to with
PPUA. Um that that access road gets
removed. We're doing all the buffer
plantings and those pieces as part of
that. So, um, we really did design phase
1A to to have the ultimate condition
that we think is going to be there for a
little while. Um, obviously if we get
funding and are able to move forward
with the next phase early, that would be
great, but that's not we're planning
for.
>> Any other commission questions?
Michael,
>> still following up on your question
because I don't think we have an answer
yet. What happens? So, we have not
satisfied all the conditions of the
master development permit. If phase 1B
does not proceed, how do you how do you
ensure that the site is restored in some
condition that that um said you you
mentioned um that all of the trees would
not be planted in one B. and we're going
to hydro seed, but is that the restored
condition that the city is looking for?
Or are there other requirements that the
city has in code that says since the
project did not proceed now, you're
obligated to
do something here or is that at the
discretion of the city?
>> There's not specific code requirements
like in our land use code that says, you
know, if in any project if phase two
doesn't happen, this is what has to
happen. Um, like the applicant said,
there's Department of Ecology standards
that require things to be returned and,
um, you know, there is this condition
about restoring the land. Um, if the
elementary school isn't done, the
commission is welcome to add a condition
onto the amendment about if phase 1B
isn't done. If you want a similar
condition as this ending of um,
condition 11 about res have to make sure
that phase 1B area is restored as well,
but there is not a specific code
requirement around that.
>> Yeah. So then the question becomes
what's the standard that you would have
to meet or is it like back at the
discretion if we added a condition like
that would that be at the discretion of
the city to decide whether additional
tree plantings would be required to uh
replace those that have been removed
that haven't been uh as part of the
original condition or some other
condition that you would have applied to
the property to ensure it's stable and
>> sure
>> meets the environmental requirements.
Yeah, I would imagine it would be
something along the lines of the end of
condition 11. But um the
for instance the landscape permit that's
going to be required the landscape
construction permit that's going to be
required as part of phase 1A that's
submitted for that makes sure that all
required trees have been planted all
plant all required plantings have been
planted. So it it's not like there will
be any trees that haven't been planted
yet that are required to meet tree
density, tree replacement, those type of
standards. The landscape construction
permit ensures that the code required
plantings and trees happen
>> with phase 1 A
>> with phase 1 A.
>> Okay. Okay.
>> Yeah. John,
>> uh, getting back to when you talked
about leaving the area that's cleared
and grub and the state would have a
different requirement.
>> What what are those requirements that
for instance if one 1A doesn't get done
and we have some areas that are they're
exposed
>> at some grade? What would the state
require you to do?
>> So the the state basically has
requirements and it comes down to wet
season or dry season. So they define
that in the manual, but basically if
you're in the summer, you can go up to
30 days without before you have to cover
or hydro seed or do something with that
area. During the winter, you get three
days.
>> So So the state requires covering, hydro
seeding or hay bales or something like
that.
>> Yep. Yeah. So there's an NPDS
requirement for construction. The city
has one for their storm water system.
Each construction site gets kind of the
same thing. And then we're monitoring
water leaving our site, verifying that
we're we're within the um
erosion limits of the water that leaves
our site. And um so we need to meet
those requirements as well as the the
clearing and um coverage requirements.
>> In your opinion, is the state more
stringent or is the city of Isqua?
>> It's it's kind of two different
standards. So, the city code requires
you to get the state permit. So, you're
kind of covered on both standpoints. Um,
I think the way the condition was worded
was was really trying to get at removing
the stockpile I drew like that. That was
really the goal of it. And so once we
did that, we want to make sure that you
get something down. And so, that's the
language that was come up with.
Richard,
>> one more question for staff regarding
impact fees.
So, SEPA matrix condition 65 says the
project will pay transportation impact
fees the city of Isiqua in accordance
with IMC 3.71
and 3.71 refers to a subsection 3.710
fee collection. The traffic impact fee
shall be calculated and assessed at the
time of issuance of a building permit
except as provided in a subsection which
refers to single family homes only. No
building permit shall be issued until
the impact fee has been paid in full by
the applicant provided that payment of
the impact fee may be phased if the
building permit for the development is
also phased.
However, in the SEIPA matrix, it looks
like impact fee is only collected to be
collected at the end of phase two. Is
that correct?
>> Um, honestly, I'm not quite sure the
condition you're referring to. The
impact fees come with the building
permits. So, that's not something that I
evaluated as part of the amendment since
that's outside the scope of what the
amendment was about. That's not a
specific portion that I looked at.
Generally, yes. Impact fees are
collected at building permit issuance.
>> Okay. And this may be phased. So
that's collected only at the end of
phase two, however, and not building
permit issuance at phase 1 A, 1B, and
two.
>> Yeah.
>> So we last time got to the point where
we were about ready to pick up our
permit. And so there's a big number for
that permit which includes the impact
fees. So you would pay the impact fees
for each individual building permit. So
we'll have a phase 1A building permit,
phase 1 B that obviously they're it's
based on students. So the fee goes down
a little bit and we pay it in chunks
which is great for the school district,
great for the city. You'll get money
over a long time. So
>> So it is paid in chunks. Yeah, it looks
like in the matrix it's only yes at the
end of phase two.
Oh, I got you. Sorry for that.
>> Okay, we've got chunks. Thank you. That
that makes sense. Thank you.
>> Any other comments, questions?
>> Maybe just a comment. Um, so
as was mentioned at the beginning of the
staff presentation that what's in front
of us is a pretty narrow scope of an
amendment. um recognizing that
um you know this the future of this
project is um still a question but I
can't see the future. So leave that to
the school district to um plan for their
needs um and um strategies for funding
um school projects. Um the the
amendments that we have in front of us,
I think there were a number of questions
that we had. Um I've got satisfactory
responses to the questions that I have
about um the project and how it will
proceed in this new phased approach as
well as the minor amendments to the to
the um building entrance and uh loading
dock and trash etc. So, I'm prepared to
support the motion um tonight um but
also uh recognize the passion that's in
the room and appreciate the comments um
very articulate and knowledgeable people
walked up to the microphone tonight um
who care about the the city, care about
schools um and I think the future um and
I I hope that people remain engaged and
and hopefully there's a successful
outcome um for everyone here if that's
possible. posible. But in any case, I'm
prepared to support the motion that's on
the floor.
>> Well,
>> I guess just one comment too about about
um section 11 or condition 11. It seems
like that's been one of our biggest
question marks is what happens if we do
1 A but not 1 B.
But looking back on it, section
condition 11 was written on the basis
what if there was phase one but not
phase two. So now we're just going phase
one A and B. So it was the approval was
anticipating the possibility of it not
going all the way through.
So in terms of trying to make changes
there, I'm not sure how we would do that
despite the question marks. I think
there would have been question marks
then. So just one thought about that.
Uh, I also want to thank staff and the
applicant for addressing the commission
and the public's comments and questions.
I think you covered everything that came
up tonight.
Just want to mention uh it's been a
while since my daughter's been in Isiqua
High School, but recently I've been
doing some mentoring in the school
system and my mentee moved on from
middle school to high school and I
haven't been that was my first
opportunity to be in Isiqua High School
recently and I can vouch for the
observations that it is highly
overcrowded. I really could not imagine
the amount of traffic that was going on
between class and after lunch period. So
I think the development is clearly a
school that we need.
>> Thank you. Does that conclude
deliberation?
All right. And then uh I think we should
restate
um
the motion. And my computer fell asleep.
Would someone else mind reading it?
Madam Chair, I'd be happy to do that.
>> Thank you.
>> Oh, yeah. Yeah, let's do that.
Madam Chair, I move that the development
commission approve the major amendments
to the site development permit and
master site plan known as Isizqua High
School number four and elementary school
number 17 MSPA25-00003
as described and evaluated in the staff
report date dated November 4th, 2025
with exhibits 1 through 13 subject to
the conditions therein and as amended
tonight. And and I move that the
development commission direct the
community planning and development
department to prepare findings of fact
and conclusions for review and approval
by the development commission chairwoman
affirming the development commission's
decision to approve the major amendment
to the site development permit and
master site plan known as Isizqua High
School number four and elementary school
number 17.
MSPA-
MSPA25-
Z0000003
subject to the conditions listed in the
staff report dated November 4th, 2025
with exhibits 1 through 13 subject to
the conditions therein and as amended
tonight.
>> All in favor of the main motion say I.
>> I. I.
>> Chair, did you get a second?
>> Oh, sorry. Just making sure.
>> The motion is approved.
Ola, did you vote?
Ola, you're on mute.
Ola, did you vote?
>> I I did vote. I'm sorry.
>> Okay. And what is your vote?
>> Uh I I move to approve.
>> Okay. Thank you.
So the motion is approved.
This concludes the major amendment to
the master site plan and site
development permit for Isiqua High
School number four and elementary school
number 17 permit. A notice of decision
will be issued by staff within 7 days.
Uh staff, are there any city council
updates?
>> There are not.
>> Okay. And any other business the
commission should be aware of? Um just
our December 3rd meeting, we will be
going over light rail study evaluation
criteria. Our senior transportation
planner will be here to discuss that
with the commissioners and we will also
be talking about amendments to our
rules.
>> Thank you.
>> Thank you to staff, the applicant, and
members of the public.
There being no further business before
the commission, I adjourn the meeting at
Oh, sorry, one more one more thing.
Well, I I actually I do have a few
council updates if you don't mind me
step back. Um I just wanted to let you
know recently we just updated all of our
permit fees. So those will uh go into
effect in um
January, sorry, 2026. Um we also updated
our school impact fees recently. Those
also go into effect on in January 20
January 1st. Um, we also talked about
the I don't know if you all have been
aware of the Belleview College
development agreement potential
expansion or expansion area. It's not a
potential area. It's 19 acres up in the
Isqua Highlands that was originally
washed out property purchased by Bel
Bellev College. They have asked to
extend their development agreement for
another year. With this extension, they
have the potential of putting housing up
on that site uh if it is approved by
city council for the next year. They
will do outreach to the city council or
outreach to the community and figure out
what they're going to do with that site
within that two years. If they want to
do housing, they can do it after that.
If it won't be extended anymore, they
only allowed to use institutional uses.
I just thought I'd update you on that.
And then our comprehensive plan was
recently updated as well. Just few
things going on.
Thank you.
There being no further business before
the commission, I adjourn the meeting at
8:43 p.m.