And will they signal?
>> Arsen, we're ready to go.
>> Okay. Good evening and welcome. Um, as
the development commission's chair and
vice chair are absent, I as the staff
liazison would like to call the May 6
city of Isiziqua Development Commission
meeting to order at 6:30 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 me
at emilymedisquawa.gov.
Excused absence for this meeting is
chair shore and vice chair Akita.
Alternate member Mayo is filling in this
evening as a regular member. Welcome,
Commissioner Mayo. Um as the
commissioner commission chair and vice
chair absent the commission members pre
present shall elect a temporary chair
who shall have full powers of the
position for this meeting only.
Please note an alternate member cannot
be selected per commission rules. First
I will take nominations for the
temporary chair. If only one person is
nominated a vote is not necessary. If
more than one person is nominated we
will put it to a vote. Uh can a
commissioner please put forth a
nomination? I put forth forth
Commissioner Morgan as uh temporary
chair for this evening's meeting.
>> Thank you, Commissioner Brennan. Any
objections or other nominations?
Great. Hearing none, Commissioner Morgan
will be our temporary chair for this
evening and I will pass the meeting over
to him. Thank you.
>> Great. Thank you, Emily. Um, first item
in business for us tonight now is
approval minutes uh to take action um on
the meeting minutes from November 19th,
2025.
It's been a minute. Uh I hope everyone's
had an opportunity to review the
minutes. Are there any corrections to
the November 19th minutes provided in
the agenda packet?
>> Mr. Chair, um there is an amendment that
I'd like to propose here. Um
the vice chair Iikita was attendant in
attendance at the last meeting and the
minutes do not reflect that. So I'd make
a motion to amend the minutes to add uh
vice chair Aikita as commissioners that
were present.
Thank you. There a second.
>> Second.
>> Any questions, comments? Hearing none.
All in favor say I. I. I.
>> I.
Motion carries.
Now take a motion on the main.
>> Mr. Chair, I move approval of the
meeting minutes from the Wednesday,
November 19th, 2025 meeting.
>> As amended.
>> As amended.
>> Thank you. We have a second.
>> Second.
>> Thank you. All in favor?
>> I.
>> No oppos. Meetings are approved. Thank
you.
Uh, 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 Trail Head Apartments
project. Miss Jackson, has anyone signed
up to make general public comments?
>> No, chair, they have not.
>> Thank you.
Anyone
else from the room
like to make general comments?
Oh, my name is Geraldine Kerry and my
address is 955 17th Place Northwest
Isakqua. I've been coming to these
meetings since I moved here in 1970
1980. So, I've been around a long time,
seen a lot of faces, and I'm here to
address um the trail heads uh building
development that is
going to be presented today. And I'm a
little bit nervous because I went on the
website and saw that there were two
buildings. So, I'm I was planning to
address the two buildings that are to be
developed. And I just now found out that
there's only one the north building
that's going to be addressed tonight.
But uh my concern is I'm really
want an input on and answers from the
city on parking. I think that's a major
issue in any development. And I think
when you have a lot of people moving in,
you need to provide parking. Not just a
place for them to live, but a place for
them to park. because if you don't
provide parking, it's going to influence
all the other people who are around in
the area. So, um I just want to make
sure and my questions are
if um the units don't have enough
parking places, where will these people
park? Will they park on the street? Will
they park on private property? and who
will enforce their parking when when um
they're using somebody else's space. My
main concern, not my main concern, but
I'm interested to know if these
um houses or apartments will have
assigned parking because if they have
assigned parking,
then it seems like um it would eliminate
some of the the confusion about where
people are going to park. But um I think
you need to seriously think about making
enough parking requirements so that the
whole neighborhood is not traumatized by
cars parking in their properties. Thank
you.
>> Thank you, Miss Carrie.
Are there any other comments from the
public?
General comments?
Hearing none, we'll move to the next
part of our meeting, which is the public
hearing. Uh for the agenda item uh it's
a preddecision open record public
hearing. The order of operation for this
hearing will be as follows. First the
purpose of the public hearing followed
by appearance of fairness disclosures.
Then we'll open the public hearing with
a staff presentation followed by an
applicant presentation.
Then open the floor for public comment.
Opportunity for rebuttal by applica by
applicant. Then staff will close the
public hearing. The commission will
deliberate and then take action
including motions, amendments,
discussion, and votes. Uh we'll then
conclude the agenda item on the quasi
judicial permit. If for any reason the
hearing cannot be completed this
evening, it may be continued to a
specified date.
The purpose of this public meeting is a
formal public hearing for the proposed
site development permit for trail head
apartments. The purpose of this hearing
is to solicit uh relevant public
comment, 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 doctrine.
>> Thank you, Chair Morgan.
Um, all right. So, I'm going to go
through a couple slides and if the
commissioners um want to ask a question
could speak into your microphone, make
sure it's on to affirm um or deny the
questions. So, quasi judicial decisions
context um requires proceedings to be
fair in fact in appearance. Exparte
contacts are prohibited. Um, and the
question to ask yourself would 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.
Okay.
All right. Questions for the
commissioners. With regards 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.
>> 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. 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.
>> Will there be any prospective employment
for you or your family as a result of
the decision?
>> No.
>> Do you own or control property within
300 ft of the subject property?
>> No.
>> Have you had any exparte communications
regarding this project?
>> No.
Do 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.
>> Questions for the audience. Does anyone
in attendance wish to challenge the
participation of any commissioner based
on the parents of fairness doctrine?
I see none.
All right, I will pass it off.
>> Hello. Uh, my name is Abby Weber. Um, I
am a senior planner with BHC
Consultants. Um I my company has been
providing consulting services to
just as a note we're opening the public
hearing at 6:40 p.m.
Oh,
next page. Thank you, Abby. Um
Abby, I'll need to swear you in. Please
state your name and position with the
city for the record.
>> Abby Weber, uh, planning consultant.
>> Do you swear by oath or affirmation that
the testimony you're about to provide is
true?
>> I do.
>> Thank you. Please proceed with your
presentation.
>> All right. Um, thank you. So, again, my
name is Abby Weber. I'm a planning
consultant working for the city of
Isiqua. I have been the primary planner
assigned to this project. Um, and I've
been working with the city for um, a
little over two years, I believe.
Oh, okay. Um, so, uh, the subject of
this public hearing this evening is, uh,
the Trail Head Apartments project. Um,
the site is located at 1467 Northwest
Maple Street. It is in the central, uh,
central Isiquest sub area in the urban
core zone or UC zone. The land use
designation is mixed use. Um there is an
existing type 2 green necklace trail
connection to the north of the site uh
called the Maple Juniper Trail. Um and
then a half block to the south of the
site, there is a type one connection um
that is planned along the north side of
Newport uh way northwest. Um and then
there's the existing Tibets Valley Park
located um half block to the south
across Newport Way.
So, the proposed development is of a um
eight-story mixeduse affordable housing
project. Um it contains 157 dwelling
units. Um one co-living suite with five
sleeping units. Um an approximately
10,000 square foot opportunity center.
162 total parking spaces. Um two
pedestrian passages along the um uh west
edge of the building along the south
edge of the building. So the site plan
that you are seeing on the screen now uh
north is actually oriented to the to the
left of the screen.
um a new public street is proposed um
that will result from a 30 and a half
foot um public dedication along the
eastern edge of the site. So that will
be called um 14th Avenue Northwest. Um
the project includes water, sewer, storm
water and frontage improvements um and
also wetland enhancements. Um and the
project also includes um approval of
three um deviations from public work
standards and we'll talk more about
those on a later slide.
Uh so this project began um with a
memorandum of understanding between the
city and King County housing uh housing
authority um in 2022. Um so this uh
memorandum of understanding outlined um
specific items for um development of the
site. So that included uh levels of
affordability and um a space for a
city-owned health center. Um, so that's
the opportunity center. Um, so, uh,
since then, um, uh, KCHA or the King
County Housing Authority identified, um,
several code requirements that were
prohibitive to development of the site
and state law actually authorizes, um,
cities to wave parts of their, um, land
use code um, for housing authority
buildings. Um so on uh in July of 2025,
the city um council approved um a
housing cooperation agreement and that
was included as exhibit A um to the
staff report. And so that uh agreement
waved or changed um eight code
requirements that apply to this project.
And so those are referred to also
referred to as deviations um throughout
the staff report.
So, um, these are the eight different
deviations that were granted. Um,
they're referred to as 1 through eight,
um, throughout the staff report, um, and
my presentation. Um, the first one
waved, um, a requirement for a fifth
fifth floor step back. Um, the second
one, um, combined, um, the requirement
for common and private outdoor amenity
space. Uh, the third one waved the 40%
ground level transparency requirement,
um, along certain facades. Uh the fourth
one allowed um the applicant to
substitute the evergreen sustainable
standards um in place of the lead
platinum standards that the city code
requires. Uh the fifth one waved um the
requirement for um uh retail to wrap the
structured uh parking garage. Uh the
sixth one waved tree retention
requirements. The seventh one reduced um
required transparency for facades um
facing natural areas. And the eighth one
allowed um uh bike storage facil uh the
bike storage room to face the natural
area with um limited transparency.
Uh so as I mentioned this is a 100%
affordable housing project at or below
80% area medium income. Um that's AMI.
Um this project is well as a mixeduse
project in the UC zone. Um this uh
project is subject to the occlusionary
zoning requirements and they have
selected option one um which requires
12.5% affordable housing at or below 60%
AMI. Um so of the total units 20 of them
will be um at or below 60% AMI. Uh so
because the project is 100% affordable
um they um are allowed to take advantage
of the um central Isiqua development
bonus program um and so they're allowed
to exceed the base F and the base height
limits. So F is increasing from uh 3.0 0
to 4.12 um and the maximum is 5 and then
the height limit is increasing from the
base height limit of um 60 ft up to 83.5
um and the maximum is 125.
Oh, and I just want to point out so this
table here is um u showing the the
city's 2044 um uh housing needs by
income bracket. So this project will
fall help the city achieve those housing
goals. Um and it'll fall so if you see
there's the the 50 to 80 AMI range. Um
so it'll help the city meet that need
for 460 units.
Um so during the course of review this
the site was reconfigured. So in those
initial application materials um you and
then throughout the plan set you may see
um that it may appear that the project
site is twice as large. So the initial
application actually included two
buildings. Um and then uh during the
course of review the applicant reduced
the size of the site uh roughly in half.
Um so the north building is the
affordable housing project. Uh the south
building will be a market rate project
and that will be developed under a
future permit. Um so um the applicant
has chosen to shortplat the site
creating two new lots. Um that shortplat
application has recently been submitted
and is under review by the city. Um and
uh condition number one on the staff
report requires um short plat u that the
short plat must be recorded prior to
issuance of a building or construction
permit. Um and then there's also going
to be a um public plaza covenant that
spans the center line between the north
and the south building um roughly
building face to building phase. And so
that will require um uh public access
and in development of that public plaza
between the two buildings.
Uh so we will jump into building and um
site design. Uh so there is a wetland
along the um western edge of the site.
So that wetland will be enhanced for um
environmental storm water um and passive
enjoyment. Um the building will be
oriented um to the wetland. Um and
deviation number seven allows for uh
reduced openings um on the facade facing
that natural area. So, the code requires
um 50%
um uh uh doors and windows on a facade
facing the natural area, but the
deviation allows for um only um 20% um
of the wall to be made up of doors and
windows. Um but so while the deviation
allows 20%, 21% is actually proposed.
The entries of the building are designed
to be distinct um and oriented towards
transportation facilities. Um
connections to green necklace amenities
are proposed. Um pedestrian amenities,
weather protection and special paving is
provided. Uh there are no blank walls
longer than 30 ft.
Um deviation number eight um allows will
allow bicycle storage areas um with
limited transparency um on exterior
walls facing the wetland. And so this is
in response to a code requirement uh
that prohibits uh any uh activities or
building uses that um would appear to
close off the building from natural
areas. So um bicycle storage falls in
that category. So there will be um some
transparency but um the bicycle storage
area is allowed for a maximum width of
65 ft um on that facade.
uh deviation. Um so there will be uh so
deviation number three grants relief
from the 40% transparency requirement um
on the east facade along 14th Avenue and
then the south facade along the east
west passage. Um but the project will
comply with transparency requirements by
providing um about 62% transparency on
the north facade and 41% on the west
facade.
Um and then again deviation number four
um will allow the applicant to
substitute those evergreen sustainable
development standards um in place of the
lead platinum program. And those um
evergreen sustainable development
standards were actually developed um for
application to affordable housing
projects.
And I also just want to point out that
um condition number five um will require
the project to meet um rooftop material
requirements. um
that is um analyzed in the building
design section as well.
Uh so since the project is located in
the central ISUqua sub area, the central
isqua design and architectural standards
apply. So these standards supersede um
other design standards. Um these
standards also require throughblock
passages. Um so these are provided so
two throughblock passages are provided
on site. The the north south oriented
passage between the wetland and the
building and then the east west oriented
passage that will be on the south side
of the building and then additional
connectivity is created by the new
street with sidewalk improvements along
the eastern edge of the site.
The project has selected the Northwest
contemporary style standards. Um they
are meeting the massing requirements by
providing a simple base um with a
cornice treatment um and a C-shaped
building at the upper levels. Um they're
um complying with scale requirements by
providing vertical articulation and
vertical emphasis in the design of the
facades. Um deviation number one will
allow the project um to deviate from
those uh upper level stepback
requirements above the fifth floor.
Um they are providing at least 75% brick
or simulated wood materials. They're
providing variation in window types. Uh
they're providing a flat roof which
which is not a dominant design feature.
um and materials are provided in natural
tones.
162 total parking spaces are provided um
for the development. Um 120 are required
for the residential use and 123 are
proposed. 39 are required for the
opportunity center use and 39 are
proposed. Uh six motorcycle spaces are
required and six are proposed. and um
their vehicular parking is meeting will
be meeting EV standards.
So the parking area is shown um in
yellow on this graphic. Um so the
project requires 11 short-term um
bicycle parking spaces and 12 are
proposed um and requires 161 long-term
spaces but 162 are proposed. Um so
short-term bicycle parking spaces um
they are required to be located within
50 ft um of the primary entrance. Uh
because uh two of those 11 spaces are
actually required for the opportunity
center. Um staff recommends a condition
that um two of the spaces be located
within be moved to be relocated within
um 50 ft of that opportunity center
entrance. Um so if you're looking at
this slide, I've highlighted the um
long-term parking area in blue. That's
internal storage. And then in green in
the lower right uh left corner, that's
where the short-term bike parking is
located near the primary residential
entrance. So two of those um spaces um
we recommend that they're relocated
within 50 ft of that um opportunity
center entrance.
Uh so two loading spaces are required
and proposed. Um those are highlighted
in orange in the upper right corner um
of the graphic. and staff recommends a
condition that um signage be required uh
for hours of operation per code.
Um and then again I want to refer you to
dev deviation sorry this is a typo on
the screen deviation number five
actually um grants relief um from the
requirement that commercial or
residential uses um wrap the parking
structure. So, this requirement is met
along Maple Street. Um, but relief is
granted along 14th Avenue.
So, on to trees and landscaping.
All right. So, um tree the tree
retention requirement is 25%. Um but the
um housing cooper cooperation agreement
um granted relief from waved that
requirement. Um the canopy coverage
requirement is 25% uh but 47% is
proposed. Um so I wanted to point out
that uh 9,456
ft of existing canopy is included in um
that canopy coverage calculation and the
rest will be met with replacement trees
on site.
Um, condition number 13, um, in the
staff report, uh, uh, requires that the
applicant submit a tree plan that
complies with the code and tree
protection guidelines in the arborous
report.
Um, in regards to landscaping, um, so
the, um, landscaping meets the
diversity, size, and spacing standards.
Um, native plantings are proposed
between the building and the wetland. Um
and then the ground level landscaping
areas uh meet minimum um dimensional
requirements of 100 square feet and at
least five feet wide.
Um so the
um common um outdoor amenity space
requirement was modified by deviation
number two. Um so this required um this
combined the requirement for um common
and private outdoor amenity areas
resulting in um a total requirement of a
148 square ft. So it can be met by any
combination of common and private
amenity space. Uh so the proposed
development um requires
23,784
square ft and they are exceeding this
requirement with 29,729
square ft.
um 30% of um the amenity space must be
landscaped and they are um proposing a
total of um they're landscaping 34% of
the total um amenity area.
158 seats are required and 165 are
proposed. Um wayfinding signage is
provided um as required by code and
they're loc providing in three locations
um where those pedestrian passages
intersect in the southwest corner and
then where they meet the streets on both
the north um and the eastern edges of
the site. Um and the project complies
with the rooftop and playcape um amenity
space requirements. Um the
non-residential use results in a
requirement of um 400 square feet of
community space. Um and this BA staff
recommends uh a condition that this
space be um required to comply with the
plaza requirements. So that's um
conditions eight and nine. So condition
number eight um will require further
development of the design of the space
to accommodate year-round use. Um and
they could do this by incorporating a
pergola, a gazebo, or another form of
weather protection. And then condition
number nine um uh requests that they
update the landscape plan to show that
at least 25% um but not more than 40% of
the open space is landscaped with trees,
ground cover or other vegetation and
then incorporate root bar uh root
barriers for all trees within the plaza.
Um and again um pedest the pedestrian
passages provide connections to green
necklace amenities.
So uh lighting is largely reviewed with
the um construction permit. Um the city
uses a third party consultant to ensure
that the development complies with um
performance um methods and other
technical lighting standards. So at this
um stage of review, the lighting
consultant reviewed four um design
related lighting lighting regulations.
Uh amenity areas were found to be
uniformly lit with pedestrian scale
fixtures. Primary entrances are
highlighted by lighting. Um and um the
lighting consultant did include some um
comments for further development on the
lighting plan and the cut sheets. Um so
staff recommends a con condition number
10 that will require these comments to
be resolved at the time of construction
permitting.
Um, so as I mentioned before, there's a
uh wetland along the western edge of the
site. This is a category 4 wetland that
requires a 50-ft buffer. Um, trail and
storm water facilities are allowed in
the outer 25% of that buffer.
Um as proposed um split rail fencing is
proposed along the wetland boundary and
that will um reduce human uh disturbance
of the wetland. Um there'll be no
lighting or noise impacts. Um and
wetland enhancement will um occur in
accordance with the mitigation plan. Um
so condition number 11 will require
compliance with the mitigation plan.
Um the site is also located within a
class 3 critical aquifer recharge area.
Uh this means that a phase one ESA was
required during review. Um this uh study
indicated there was a potential for an
underground storage tank on site. Um so
condition number 12 in the staff report
um requires removal and notification of
the city um if it is discovered.
So um the project included three
deviation requests from public works
standards. Um so there was um there was
a request from a a street standards
deviation request from core street um
requirements. Um and this was approved.
Um so this modifies the um half street
section by um sorry of 14th north 14th
street northwest by removing the bike
lane um parking lane and buffer along
the project site and allowing the
sidewalk to be reduced from 8t to 5t. Um
while providing the multi-use trail on
the west side of the development. Um so
this again was approved by the uh city
staff. Um the second request was um so a
street another street standards
deviation request from to allow a curb
bulb along northwest Maple Street. This
was approved. So this allowed um
construction of a 23- foot long curb
bulb um along Maple Street um which is
an arterial roadway. So, this curveball
will align with the city standards for
on street parallel parking. Um, but it's
being added to support um the unique
needs um of the residents um and pick
off and drop off access uh for
specialized uh transit vehicles.
Um and then deviation number three um
was a deviation request from water
standards to allow a dead-end water man.
Um and so this the city has um included
uh sorry so um city staff is inclined to
approve this request um subject to the
resolution of staff comments that are
included on um exhibit AA. So condition
number 14 um requires that the applicant
satisfy those comments in order to um
gain approval of that deviation.
Um so the uh site is in planned action
area 2 of the central Isiqua sub area
plan EI environmental impact statement.
Um so it is subject to planned action
ordinance number uh 2665.
Um a planned action determination was
issued on um April 20th, 2026.
Um and so this found that no further um
seer review was required because it was
meeting the requirements of that EIS and
planned action.
Um so this determination did not include
a public comment period but notice of
application
um notice of the SEIPA application did
um in September late September 2025. So
public comments were received at that
time. Um these comments pertain to
traffic, parking circulation, ground
floor commercial use, um the effects of
the project on neighboring properties
and um the overall neighborhood dynamic
and design elements like balconies. Um
so these public comments are all
compiled and included as exhibit E. Um
and the applicant provided a written
response to the public comments which is
included as exhibit FF.
A community meeting was also held on
November 5th, 2025.
Um comments at that meeting pertain to
parking capacity
um versus demand balconies for
affordable units. Uh lack of stepbacks
for the facade where the project is um
sorry where the project is questioning
where the project was in the development
process utilities um and then um the
rightway dedication. And so these um
public comments were addressed uh by the
applicant team at the time of the
meeting and staff summarize uh the
public comments and the applicant's
response in the community meeting
summary memo which is included as
exhibit GG.
Um so staff recommendation is to um
approve um the project subject to
conditions 1 through 14 in the report.
Um
uh after
eventually you'll be asked to um approve
as proposed, approve with modified
conditions or deny the project. Uh and
we would now like to open it up to
questions.
>> Great. Thank you, Miss Weber, for the
especially for the very extremely
detailed uh staff presentation in the
package. Uh any questions from the
commission on the staff's presentation?
Well, I have probably three layered
around the deviations. Is this does the
staff also recommend that we accept the
deviations?
>> You said the conditions, but are the
>> the do you are you referring to the
public works deviations or to the
housing
>> the housing authority zoning?
>> Um, so those are already approved.
>> Oh, they are. So that's that's baked.
Okay, that was really my question.
>> So that's essentially those are the code
requirements that apply to this project.
>> Okay. Uh and then so part two, the the
market uh rate housing that's phase two,
will it also have those uh deviations
pre-approved?
>> I may need to defer to city staff.
>> Some but not all of the deviations were
approved by council.
>> Okay.
>> For the market rate.
>> And then I guess last, what drives the
request for those deviations? Is it to
maximize density, maximize units, or
reduce cost? Both. Something else. So
I'm I the applicant can answer better
than me, but a lot of it is driven by
cost.
>> Okay.
>> Yes.
>> All right. Thank you.
>> Any other questions for the staff based
on their presentation?
>> Brendan.
>> Yeah, Mr. Chair. Just a couple related
to um one the permit process for the the
building the south building that would
require a separate uh SDP and building
permit etc. So that would be a
standalone project that most likely
would become in front of the commission
at a later date. No time frame set on
when that redevelopment might happen or
that development might happen.
>> We need to defer to the applicant.
>> Yeah. And I and I should um introduce
myself to I guess I'm Kristen Leon, the
planning manager. And no, we've been in
discussions with them. I know that
they've started design, but I don't
believe they own the property yet. And
so, no, there is no timeline set up for
that.
>> They don't.
>> And the the applicant is not here for
the south for the south building for the
market rate.
>> Okay. So, there's separate property
owners for the two project.
>> Not yet. Right now, King County owns the
entire parcels. Is that still correct?
Yes. Right now, King County still owns
the entire parcel.
>> Okay. Um then just a follow-up question.
So, there's um some uh the plaza and
it's noted in the condition, but in the
plaza and then you've got a uh you know
multi- um purpose walkway that runs um
alongside the buildings between the
properties. there'll be covenants added
to the short plat um as a condition.
Otherwise, I'm curious about how do you
ensure that these two buildings if you
have separate property owners and it's
going to redevelop at some later date?
>> Yes.
>> Satisfy the the broader design criteria
that's trying to be satisfied with the
site layout.
>> Yes, the plaza was included in the
memorandum of understanding that was
done between the city and King County
Housing Authority, but that was with the
housing authority. So yes, um I believe
the draft plaza covenant is included in
your packets as an exhibit. It's a
draft, but it is going it will be
included and recorded with the short
plat once that is approved.
>> And then will it also address the um
multi-purpose kind of walkway that runs
from north to south through alongside
the buildings?
>> Um I'm going to have to ask the
applicant to do that one. I I believe
it's included in the short plat.
>> Okay. as an ement but
>> I can wait
>> that question.
>> Um okay that's
>> I do have a couple questions. Uh one is
condition five.
What are the rooftop requirements that
the city would be looking for
>> compared to what is there?
>> I have to go to that section of the
analysis.
Um, so I'm looking on page 12 of the
staff report. Um, there are so that's in
chapter um 18 um 602 building design
standards of the code. So there are
specific requirements that apply to uh
rooftops including um specific um
rooftop materials and that's just not a
level of detail that you typically see
at site development permit. So the
condition would just require the
applicant to demonstrate how they're
meeting those material requirements at
the time of building permit review.
>> Okay. So it wasn't something they had
there that did not meet code. We just
don't know what this area.
>> Yeah. Yep.
>> Great. Okay. Thank you. Um and then uh
can you talk about 14th Street Northwest
and a couple things a half street
improvements
and is it a 30 foot 30 and 1/2 ft
rideway dedication on this parcel and
will it require another 30 feet on the
joining parcel to the east at some point
or will the 30t be
>> le the applicant to speak to this? Yes.
When the other parcel comes in, it will
be required to build the other half of
the rideway
>> to the to the east to to the east. Yeah.
The other half of 14th Avenue Northwest.
>> So the road that would be built would be
half of a road,
>> right? So the one that's going to be
built will will be two-way. And so it'll
have two, I believe, 10 or 11 foot
lanes. When it comes when the full road
is extended out, then it will also
include parking and bike lanes on both
sides as well as the two drive lanes.
>> Okay. That's why I was wondering it
would have become just an alley, but
when it expands, it has to be done both
ways, including by this owner.
>> Correct.
>> We'll have to make those improvements.
>> Yeah. And really, this will include
mostly striping. So, it'll Yeah. I think
I think that the at that the future um
person the future developer to the east
will then do the restriping and finish
out the road
>> and and this parcel would require
sidewalks to be put in then
>> this part this one is having sidewalks
put in.
>> Oh, it is.
>> Yes, they're just going to be reduced to
five feet and they will remain five
feet.
>> Okay.
>> Great. Thank you.
Hear no other questions for the staff.
Um, do the development team, applicant
team want to make any comments or just
we understand maybe just open to
questions.
>> Okay. So,
>> I just had a tangential question.
Typically these dwelling units, what's
the occupancy of each of those expected
approximately? Can you touch on those
mix of studio one and twobedroom units?
>> Are there maximum occupancy rates per
units or
>> well they go they go anywhere from
studios to three bedrooms. So, you know,
if you have it I mean I don't I don't
think there is a maximum occupancy rate.
We don't have that um in the city
>> just from King County doesn't
>> okay
>> they don't
>> limit
>> I'm [clears throat] Dan Landis vice
president of development at King County
Housing Authority and just I I'm not
sure if you mean what what's our uh
usually how full are our buildings so we
all across our portfolio of about 13,000
units were 97% occupied. So we imagine a
new building like this will run close to
100.
>> But but per like if you had a
threebedroom or whatever it is, there is
no cap as far as how many people can
live in.
>> Well, how many people? We do have um
occupancy standards. Yeah. That that are
I mean that our own occupancy standards
and uh I don't know what they are off
the top of my head. I think it's two
people per bedroom max. Um although
that's it's unusual in three bedrooms
that we get get to that level.
>> Thank you.
>> Other questions from
commission?
>> Yeah, Mr. Chair, I do it's it is related
to the plaza. Again, I'm still kind of
grappling with how that's going to all
work. So, you're designing and this is
probably to the applicant design team.
You're designing half of the plaza now
and is that design will it function as
an independent plaza for this what will
be an interim period before the south
property redevelops? Um and then how
does it you know uh join I guess in the
future in a in a kind of a compatible
design. Um, is that all part of the
covenant or is that just a cooperation
between what will be a the next property
owner? I'm not sure how that plaza
exists with the initial project and then
joins with the next project. Has that
been thought through in the design
development?
Hi, I'm Maggie Carson. I'm with Weber
Thompson. We're the design architects
and landscape architects for this
building. Um, when we started this
project, we actually started with a
master planning phase for the full
thing, both the north and the south. And
so I can say, uh, currently there is a
full design for the full plaza. um so
that the whole thing reads very
holistically as as one entity once it's
completed. But the portion that will be
built as part of the north parcel um
will be able to function fully on its
own. It connects all the way through and
provides the spaces that Abby outlined
in detail. Um and but it does have a big
picture design that mirrors that in a in
a um coordinated way with what happens
on the south parcel as well. Does that
help?
>> Yeah, I think so. I mean obviously it'll
be the interest of the property owner to
the south to try to do something that
works well in their interest. So I
understand I just wondering if you know
the thinking around what's going on with
phasing this project and having a
different property property owner come
in and take responsibility for that
south building site. So and how that's
going to integrate
>> and and some of that may be a question
for you guys in terms of what agreement
you have with Yeah. Dan can come back
up. We can tag team this.
>> So Dan Landis again. So uh earlier you
had asked um when we expect the uh
market rate developer to come in with
their SDP uh application. Um there was a
lot of uh work that we've done,
negotiations with them and with the city
uh and we finally were able to sign a
purchase agreement with them that was
executed last week and that was their
main I think obstacle to to before
starting in earnest the design to get
them to the site development permit and
the building permit after that. So, our
expectation is they will be coming in
before like within a couple of months
once they've had a chance to uh decide
uh figure out the size of their uh
building and what it is they exactly
want to build.
>> Great.
>> Um so, was that the
>> Yeah, thank you.
>> I have a question or clarification. So I
think um you mentioned in the
presentation uh the the road that will
be rebuilt but it won't have in in this
case um parking or bike lane. Um but
when the the full road is finished you
mentioned striping would come in and
that would would that include that on
this part of the um on on the half that
we're considering today
>> or no? Um, so when the
eastern half of 14th is constructed,
will that then include parking and bike
lane
>> on both?
>> Okay. So eventually there will be a bike
lane. Yes,
>> Mr. Chair, I'll throw in one more quick
question while I have the team up at the
microphone. Um, so there were obviously
the deviations were approved by the
council and you know those aren't in
front of the commission. Um, but the
question I have is so there's a a
reduction in the number of kind of uh
open windows and doors etc. And
particularly on the east side of the
building and I know the property owner
on the east side has expressed some
concern about what's this building going
to look like as it faces our property.
Can you talk a little bit about what
what you've done to soften that um face
of the building um you know to help with
the you know the blank the more blank
wall condition that we might face. Sure.
Um there we go. Um
yeah, you know, this is a unique
situation in that there is no alley per
se for these two buildings and so there
are back of house sort of functions that
need a home um which include loading and
trash and garage entries and things of
that nature. Um and and that's part of
what we presented back to the city
council when we looked into those
deviations, but all with the
understanding that um you know, we do
want this to still feel like a
pedestrian friendly street. We want um
people in the city of Isiqua to feel
comfortable walking up and down it. We
don't want it to feel like an alley,
right? Um so we are including higherend
materials along that facade. We have
brick down at the base in several
portions so that it maintains a similar
aesthetic to what you're seeing around
the rest of the pedestrian experience at
the base of the building. Um there are
decorative screens in locations where we
have more utilitarian functions so that
there's some artistic elements. The
decorative screens are a perforated
metal that have um a water splashing
sort of pattern on them. We've got uh
locations where we've included artwork
on columns and things like that. lots
and lots of details that add to the
pedestrian experience. Um there is still
canopy coverage wherever uh we were able
to put it in place. Um so not at the
garage entry because we don't want
trucks to run into it of course, but um
you know anywhere that it it was able to
be included, we included overhead
weather protection and things like that.
>> Thank you.
>> Yeah.
>> Just one quick thing I would add. Uh the
issue with the relatively high
transparency requirements facing a
natural area is
>> uh energy code requirements. It we we
just can't do both. And so that was the
main driver in wanting to uh decrease
the amount of uh fenestration on on
those facades.
>> Yeah, that's that is a good
clarification. Um that was a big part of
what we talked about with the city
council for the other facade, not that
facing 14th Street, but facing the
wetlands. Um, in the natural context
zone, the glazing percentage that was
requested in the zoning code is outside
of what the energy code would allow. Um,
in in general,
>> something the city might need to take a
look at in the future. [laughter]
>> A little tug of war on the technical
stuff. Uh, one more question. We had a
speaker earlier who was obviously
expressing some concerns about adequacy
of parking and, you know, potential
overflow into the neighborhoods, etc.
And one of her question was whether
parking is assigned with the uh rental
or lease agreements or whether it's open
parking for residents.
>> So um I'm not sure that that policy has
been uh decided on yet. Um I I think
we're concerned about parking for our
residents as well and our ability to to
lease up the units. That's why we didn't
ask for any deviations on the parking
from what what was required and sort of
slightly overbuilt it. Um but uh we are
aware of the issues and I think we're
we're looking into various um strategies
that might help us make parking less of
an issue for the neighborhood
>> and Pratt and uh proximity to the
transit center is definitely a benefit.
>> A plus.
Yeah, proximity to the transit center is
definitely a plus. And as Dan just
alluded to, um because this is an
affordable housing project, there were
um reductions allowed in the code that
we didn't take advantage of. So
technically speaking, we are over
building um per our use as an affordable
housing.
>> That's all I have.
Chair Morgan, will you turn on your mic?
>> Sorry. Thank you. Uh I think it's on the
south side. Um the blank wall, there's
there are two blank walls that have
treatments. I think on the south side um
those two and in one of the sets of
plans it said art mural or planting and
others said art mural. And I think the
staff report says art mural. So, and I
don't think planting unless it's a
trellis built into the building would
meet that requirement. So, can you
discuss
what what will go on those walls?
>> I believe the intention is for two large
murals in those spaces. Um, we went back
and forth a little bit with the city on
would a large scale trellis be better
for a portion of that. Um, but I believe
where we've landed, we ended up adding
the brick pilasters that you see on the
screen now. Um, and then those two
outlined rectangles are intended to be
um, art murals at this point. Yeah.
>> And then art murals is an interesting
topic.
>> Um, so is there a an approval
requirement from the city on what can go
onto an art mural?
>> Yes. The art murals would run through
our arts commission.
>> Okay. There'll be a a artist chosen and
approved by the commission.
>> I don't know if an artist will be
chosen, but the artwork would go through
the commission. Would be
>> I will have to talk to the chair and
find out how that works.
>> Okay.
>> And there would be hopefully a
preference for a local artist. We would
hope.
>> Of course.
>> Of course.
>> Yes.
>> Okay.
>> I imagine that's your preference, too.
[laughter]
>> Yeah. We have we have not done anything
as far as choosing an artist or or even
a look that we would like there, but
we're open to things like trying to find
a local artist.
>> Yeah, we have a great arts commission.
So, yeah, great to bring them in. Um the
cornis um is it possible? I think it's
in this set of plans and I think it's
A3.05N 905N.
That shows some of the detail of
the cornness.
And
so the
Yeah. So the requirement for a cornice
is
in the northwest contemporary style
cornises or similar elements must be
welldetailed and of significant
proportions height and depth that create
visual interest and shadow lines. And I
couldn't find
I found a drawing I think at 7 point AB
but I couldn't find something that
talked about what those dimensions were
for that gray cornice at the top. But to
me, it didn't seem to look like it's
welldetailed, of significant
proportions, height and depth that
create visual interest, especially given
that that's 183 84 feet from ground
level. Um, so could you talk about that
and how do we meet that requirement
because I think that's part of our
tripartite
requirement for the building. Um I
believe the lower cornis is part of the
tri part the tripartid but um it you are
totally right. You've got the code there
right in front of you about it needing
to be significant in proportions. Um we
do have details that outline how it will
be constructed and give dimensions to
the height and the setback and the canal
lever of the cornice itself. I'm not
sure if they're in the package that we
have here.
>> A it would be a detail from the A8
series. Um,
I think though the rendering at the
maybe the beginning might do a better
job because I I'll admit that when you
look at it on this screen right here and
you're only seeing a little sliver of
it, it's hard to picture does that
actually cast much of a shadow or
anything like that. But the rendering on
the front does a good job
>> on the cover sheet of the G sheet.
>> Yeah.
>> Okay. So that's I might need your help
to find a different
>> Is it back?
Okay.
>> Yeah. And somewhere we do have a
physical materials board too that can
show you the actual
uh the actual color of that cornice
compared comparatively. So um the
cornice in question there is at that
green portion. Here we go.
up against the green and up against the
white there. Um, which will help with
its distinction.
>> Is is the is the corners in this drawing
is the corners we looked at on the other
plan. It looked fairly small compared to
that wall.
>> And and here we're seeing shadows from
those cornises on the left and right
onto the green below.
>> Yes.
>> So are those different than the cornice
we saw in
>> No, that is that cornice
that this is modeled directly from the
thing that the drawings are cut from. So
it's it's the exact same thing.
>> Yeah.
It just seemed like if we if we can go
back to the other
dimension when you show that wall and
this and the size of that cornice in the
drawing, it's hard to imagine it could
create that much shadow.
>> It does.
>> Um, which which is that in the detail
set?
>> Okay. There's there's no
>> I think
>> it probably will. I can say there's no
additional Photoshop on that rendering.
It's It's the model of the building in
Revit with the sun hitting it.
[laughter]
>> Yeah. Yeah.
>> Which specific sheet?
>> No, the detail was 7B,
but that might be
>> there'll be an eight detail or from the
eight series that shows like the framing
and the dimensions of it.
>> Do you know what she
>> I don't off top of my head.
>> Oh, that level three.
>> That's one of them. That's at the brick.
Um, so it won't be one at the brick.
It'll be one that is has
>> When I was looking through, I saw level
three and level four cornises.
>> Oh, here.
>> There you go.
>> Oh, level four.
>> Isn't that uh
>> here? Cornet standing seam route.
>> Oh, nope. That's level four. Keep going.
>> Me, [clears throat] too. That also says
level four. We'd be looking for
something that says, is it that one
right there? Level four. Oh, wait. I
think you maybe just passed it right
there. Does that say
>> No, that says four.
>> They all say level four.
That one say on the far side there.
>> I think it was one of those ones up
above. I think we've passed it.
>> I I can do that.
It is similar in shape to the one at
level four, but it's not exactly the
same.
I'm not seeing
that one.
It is very similar to this.
Oh yeah, it's very similar to this one
here. Um I actually think it's slightly
bigger, but this shows that we're out an
inch and a half, which is the dimension
of a um nominal or it's the actual
dimension of a nominal piece of lumber,
which is part of what's dictating that
plus another inch and a half out. So
we've got two steps. So you're getting a
total of three inches projection um and
a height of 2, four, and 9. Um what is
that? 13 15 feet or 15 inches tall plus
the little bit of slope there. Um, and
it should be very similar to these guys
here,
although I'm not seeing it in our set.
So, so it could be a extends out 3 in
83 feet above ground.
I don't know. I'm not an architect. It
just doesn't sound like that's much of a
a
welldetailed significant proportions of
height and depth that create visual
interest and shadow lines.
Um I guess the question would be
can you make a better cornness?
>> We could look at making it bigger. Um
there are limitations at some point uh
from a structural standpoint of putting
more weight on the top of the parapit
making the parapit want to tip out. We
don't want to end up in territory where
you need to add steel to support the
parapit because of the weight of the
cornice,
>> right?
>> Um
>> but we could we could certainly
>> we are
>> Yeah,
>> I can say that most buildings of this
height have a coping coping at the top
that is between four and six inches and
sticks off about a half an inch. Um so
when you compare it to that this is
pretty substantial.
>> Yeah. And I think just with the um
central area plan and the design
standards written around the tripartite
design and and the cornice is one of the
ways that you get there instead of um
other other methods. I guess the other
possibility is can it be more ornate
than just stamped metal? Um is there
something else? And I don't know if
other commissioners concerned about it,
but part of this is our central area
plan. These design standards, we're sort
of learning them as we go, too. So,
every time we approve something, it's
setting some standards like this.
>> Um,
I don't know that it's worth necessarily
a motion or amendment, but other
commissioners, any feelings about what
you've seen?
No concerns.
I will say that it doesn't concern me.
>> Just a thought on this. I I uh agree
that a more significant,
you know, um visual um attraction of the
top of a building makes it more
interesting from a skyline or from a
distance. You're right. This is 80 plus
feet high. Um, but in this particular
instance, I'm not quite sure what we
would do
um to make it more dramatic. I think
it's kind of like you just said, we're
going to be learning from different
projects what works best. This provides
some relief. I mean, um, I don't know
that it creates a huge concern for me,
but I I I see your I definitely see your
point. It's something we should be
really paying more attention to as we go
through design development for other
projects.
I guess my question is what's what's
between the two corner massings? What is
that corner? That one appears to be
>> that one is less um as a way to help
emphasize the corner elements in
particular.
So I, you know, Mel, I don't know. Um
I I definitely hear you. I I think with
the lack of the fifth story set back,
that's unfortunate. And so now you do
have this really tall structure and this
really diminished um
uh cornis treatment. I I guess if it it
was even deeper though, does it does it
make more of an issue of the lack of the
step back almost, you know? uh is less
more in this case. Or could there be
some congruency with the corner in the
midspan? I don't know. I I hear you. But
I also I I feel like uh
yeah, much more is going to sort of it's
already out of control in my opinion. So
I'll leave it at that.
>> Okay.
Thank you. Uh any other questions or
comments?
I I had a question about the I think in
the staff report you received some
comments about um balconies and things
like that. What drove this particular
blocky design and why weren't balconies
considered?
>> Uh balconies were considered and that
was one of the things we talked with the
city council as part of design
commission or part of the um housing
cooperation agreement. Um there are
several challenges with with balconies,
especially with the requirement of them
at every unit. There's a very obvious
cost component for the affordable
housing uh developer in general. Um they
also frequently become an eyesore and uh
tenants tend to use them for storage
instead of for recreation. They tend to
um gather strollers and coolers and
things of that nature. And when you have
that at every single unit on the facade,
your whole facade is strollers and
things of that nature, um
they can become a little bit of a fire
hazard as a result of the way they get
used as storage, especially in
affordable housing. Um that requirement
is one of the deviations that the uh
city council approved for the affordable
building, but not for the market rate
building. Um and and so the market rate
building will have balconies and things
of that nature on it. I think their
feeling was while they understood the
concern for the eyesore and the storage
use um they also really heard the
concern about constructibility and cost
and burdening the affordable building
with those measures. Um, there were also
a couple of
uh city council members in particular
who commented that they live in
buildings with balconies and they never
use their balconies. I will say um we do
a lot of market rate development as well
and
it's rare a developer asks for anything
over 20% balconies. Um they just they
find that tenants aren't asking for
them. Um, and so even if we're building
something kind of high-end, our target
is usually around 25% because most
people are not actually interested in
having them.
The other question I had was with
regards to ventilation and um is there
ventilation, is there forced air, how
does that work in that particular
building?
>> Um, so every unit has an ERV. um which
is an energy recovery ventilator and it
brings in fresh air from the outside. It
uses this fancy little box that looks
like layers of corrugated cardboard is
the best way to describe it and it uses
those to transfer the heat uh between
the inside air that is exiting as part
of exhaust and the outside air that's
coming in as fresh air. So that it helps
with your heating and cooling bills. Um,
it helps from an energy use standpoint.
Um, but its primary purpose is to
provide fresh air to the unit. Um, so
there are no trickle vents or anything
like that anymore. That's all gone by
the wayside with the current energy
code. And um,
in terms of heating, it's
electric.
>> I would say electric resistance. Is it
Cove? Correct. Cove heating. Um, and in
terms of air conditioning, AC, uh,
that's not part of the current plan,
except that the windows, um, are able to
have a panel inserted that has a
pre-made hole so that you can have, um,
portable window units. Um, not the big
window units that go in your window, but
if you're familiar with the ones that I
like to call suitcase units, they look
like suitcases and they have the hose
that comes up. Um, so the building will
be prepared to be able to ser or allow
people to have air conditioning in that
way.
>> Hi everyone. Uh, Nicole Wyn, uh, project
manager on the project. I just wanted to
add that every room has an operable
window in addition to that.
>> Yes.
>> Yeah.
>> Just a quick question regarding the
retail along the ground. Um, will there
be any kinds of restrictions based on
the design that won't be permitted in
there?
not based on design but um well and to
clarify there there is no retail
proposed there's a non-residential space
and that will house um the opportunity
center which is owned will be could you
clarify
>> it will be owned by the city and it is
required by some of the funding that we
have received that it is a health and um
physical and mental health facility
>> and we talked about the parking we site
so the we weren't we are not sure yet or
we have not been informed who the tenant
will be by the city but we did allow
parking for the maximum uh usage which
would be a medical clinic. So uh it it
it is able to um handle the parking that
would be associated with that.
>> I I had a follow- on question on the
ventilation. So the market rate building
would that be the equivalent strategy to
be able to have window units in them or
>> to be determined. Um you know at this
point where they are in design and
development
it's unknown. Um they will be required
by the energy code to have an ERV. So
they will have that still for their
fresh air intake. Whether or not they
will opt to provide some sort of cooling
up to them. Yeah. They will probably
have electric resistance heat though if
I had to go.
>> Oh, really?
>> Sorry. Is that to be determined as far
as the heating?
>> Determined. Yeah.
>> Okay.
>> I do have one other question I forgot
about. um evergreen sustainable
development standards like a brief
synopsis of how that differs from lead.
>> Um Nicole might be able to speak more to
how it differs. Uh it was a program
created by Washington state specific for
buildings in Washington and all
affordable housing is required to comply
with it. Um and generally speaking, it's
not dramatically different from LEAD. It
it's different in in the sense that you
know they call things slightly
differently and they assign points
slightly differently and all of that
kind of nomenclature is a little
different here and there. Um
[clears throat]
but the overall themes of what it does
are are very very comparable to lead. Um
and in the ways that it differs it's
really more about being specific to the
needs and uses in Washington because it
was made specifically for Washington.
Uh there was a a lot of back and forth
with the city council uh before we
included that in the housing cooperation
agreement. And one of the things that
they asked us to do uh is a detailed
comparison of the lead platinum to the
the um the ESDS. And what we determined
is there um there was we needed to
choose other additional ESDS points than
what we had originally planned in order
to be roughly equivalent. Um and so we
did that. We're we are exceeding the
ESDS requirements which is 50 points. We
we're our project will have another 20
points plus we're doing things that are
are beyond ESDs like having rooftop
solar. So, um I think that we're
performing uh very much the same as we
would with LEAD. It's just that our
funding sources require that we we use
the ESDS system and so it would been uh
somewhat costly to try and satisfy both
in the same project.
>> Great. Thank you very much. Any other
questions?
>> Just one additional comment in that we
are maximizing our available rooftop
area with IP. So, we're definitely
exceeding what the minimum requirement
is.
>> Great. Thank you.
If there are no other questions from um
the commission, um we'll move into the
public comment portion of the hearing.
Miss Jackson, has anyone signed up to
comment on this topic?
>> No, sir. They have not.
>> Thank you.
Those who are in person and signed up in
advance make comments will be called on
first. If you're in the room and did not
sign up, I'll ask for other speakers
before closing this portion of the
meeting.
Um, is anybody anyone of the public
prefer to comment?
Hearing none.
Does the applicant have any rebuttal to
comments? But hearing none, so I presume
he won't.
Commissioners, are there any objections
to closing the public hearing?
hearing. None. We'll close the public
hearing at 7:47 p.m.
Now, it's time to move into deliberation
portion of the meeting. But first, we
need to make a motion. Is there a motion
on the item before the commission?
>> Mr. Chair, I'd like to make a motion. I
move that the development commission
approve the site development permit
known as the trail head apartments
SDP25-0000002
as described and evaluated in the staff
report dated May 6th 2026 with exhibits
A through JJ and I move that the
development commission direct the
community planning and development
department to prepare findings of fact
and condition or and conclusions for
review and approval by the development
commission chair
Affirming the development commission's
decision to approve the site development
permit known as a trail head apartments
SDP 25002
as described and evaluated in the staff
report dated May 6, 2026 with exhibits A
through JJ subject to the conditions
therein and as amended here tonight.
There
>> a second.
>> I second the motion.
>> It's been moved and seconded.
Is there any commission discussion?
>> I have concerns about the AC units
actually, just the aesthetics of it, you
know, and I don't know if there's
anything we could do about that. I mean,
there was comments about, you know, the
balconies becoming
in um development, you know, planned
developments. We usually have
restrictions on what can be put in the
wall units. So, I think that could
quickly become an isore. Um,
so I'm I'm concerned about that. Just
the aesthetics of that.
>> I think the AC units are ones that will
go into the apartment. They'll be inside
the apartment, but then there's the hose
that um so basically from the outside
you'd see a little circle. That is the
hose that takes out a wall. I thought
you said was like a little
>> I think she's talking about an insert
that goes into the window and it'll
>> Can you respond?
>> Oh, sure. Yeah.
>> Thank you.
>> Yeah, I'm happy to elaborate. Um, so in
the windows, the way they're made and
manufactured, there's a screen panel so
that when you open your window, you've
got a a screen and bugs don't get in.
Um, the AC panel, all it is is that
screen comes out and in place is a
plexig plexiglass piece. So, it looks
transparent. It's totally transparent
and it has a little circle port just
like you're describing so that your AC
unit which looks like a suitcase um and
sits inside your unit has a little tube
that hooks to that hole so you won't you
won't be able to really see them from
the outside. Yeah. Yeah.
Thanks for clarifying that.
>> Other thoughts on the motion. Any
amendments to the motion?
Hearing none.
It's been moved to
approve the amendment, but I'm not going
to read the whole thing again since we
just heard it. uh and seconded.
All in favor say I.
>> I.
>> I.
>> I.
>> Any oppose?
>> Motion carries unanimously. Thank you.
>> This concludes the site development
permit for the trail head apartments. A
notice of decision will be issued by
staff within 7 days.
And thank you very much for the
applicant and for Miss Weber for your
extremely detailed report and answers to
everything. Um, and we'll move to the
next item on the agenda.
Uh, the next item on the agenda was
going to be chair and vice chair
elections, but staff is going to
strongly recommend we postpone those
till our next meeting when our chair and
vice chair currently are present. So
that's all right. That's what we shall
do.
Thank you.
Uh, do we have city council updates?
>> Hi. I am I'm going to I'm going to try
and make this brief. So,
[clears throat] excuse me. So,
city council
and the mayor um would like to see more
development on the ground, particularly
housing
faster than we are getting it. Part of
this is because we need to build out our
regional growth center. We need the
housing. The region needs the housing.
And so we have worked with them and back
in March, city council approved, I
apologize, [clears throat]
approved our work plan.
And on the work plan are 17 items to
address land use code issues and
processing and peer review and so forth.
So I just want to share this list with
you and make you aware of it.
We won't be coming to development
commission. However, we would like to
hear from you. Um, so I just I want to
run through these kind of give you an
idea. We can send Emily can send you
this too. So you'll know when it's going
to council and then when it's going to
the planning policy commission for
public hearing and when we're going to
review it. So if you're interested in
coming and commenting on any of it,
being that you all do what you do and
you have to implement this, it would be
nice to hear from you. So we are just we
were put on a rather uh fast timeline.
So
um we still want your input how we can
get it. So I'm going to share this with
you.
Before you share it, what what was did
he want to go faster by what 10%. What
was his
>> pardon me?
>> What was his his turnaround time? It
takes so long to approve things. What is
he looking for? An incremental what is
it? Like
>> it's not that it takes too long to
approve things. It's just that we have
our central Isaacqua standards. We
amended the land use code. We completely
redid title 18 and we're still just not
quite seeing what we hope to see as far
as development goes.
>> We do have about,00 units that are
currently in the pipeline and are going
to start being built, but we have a lot
more capacity and we still have targets.
We have we have housing targets that
we're required to meet or accommodate
for and plan for by 2044. And so we're
trying to make sure the development
happens so that we can see those housing
units become a real thing.
>> Okay.
>> Okay.
So I've I've given this presentation
several times and I know that it takes a
while. So, I'm not going to do the whole
thing, but um first one is actually
going to public hearing. The first two
are going out for public hearing on May
14th at the planning policy commission
and one of them is outdoor amenity space
requirements. They thought they were uh
diff we were and I'll tell you first of
all, these came from our title 18
updates. You may recall that we had some
whiteboard items that were too big to
address at the time and so we're going
to come back and visit them now. So,
some of these came from that. some of
that just when developments come through
staff looks at it and goes h that didn't
really work or you know we could we
could improve that so that the ideas
came from that. The mayor spoke with
several developers and we have been
having developer round table roundt
meetings and we've gotten had several
suggestions from them and lastly council
during their council retreat that they
have every year. They had it in January
also had ideas and so we looked at all
all of those lists said these will make
a difference. There are some other
things that will make differences as
well but these things can be done within
the next year and a half that we think
would make an impact. So that is what
the C's and D's and S's stand for.
council developer staff in those lists
and we have run these by council, we
have run these by developers and we've
gotten the okay. So, we're moving
forward. So first two outdoor amenity
space requirements. We just have they
were excessive and right now our
proposal is to only require 30% of the
units to have balconies 48 ft each and
then each unit must have 100 square ft
of open common amenity space.
Stepback requirements we're adjusting
those a little bit. They were
um a little bit excessive. we are
requiring more than one in some in some
situations. We're looking at them
against natural context areas where
maybe you don't need them because you're
already in the shoreline jurisdiction.
You already have a 35 ft height limit
when you're in within those
jurisdictions. So, we're looking at not
requiring those there. Self
self-certification of ADUs. We're really
looking at pre-approved plans and
establishing a program there. Floor area
ratio. We have situations where our
floor area ratio and our height don't
really mesh up. you know, you can hit
the max height before you can hit the
floor area ratio, then why are you going
to go up above that? We're not going to
get affordable housing. So, we're trying
to rightsize that. But at the same time,
we're going to look at our inclusionary
zoning and our development bonus
programs to see how we can make all of
those work together better. That's a big
one for developers. We've heard parking
requirements, we're just going to meet
the new state law requirements about a
year ahead of time. natural context
areas and transparency requirements. We
do agree that those the transparency
requirements, one, they're a little odd
in different places. 75% here, 40% here
if you're above 6 feet, 50% if you're
against a natural context area, kind of
all over the place. So, we want to
streamline it, but we also want to um
make it a little bit more realistic.
The allowing multif family in all
commercial areas is a state law. We're
just abiding with that.
architectural design standards.
We are going to make a little bit more
of a we're proposing to make more of a
menu situation. Right now, our code says
we need this and you must meet all of
these requirements. It's not always it's
not always doable. Sometimes it's
expensive. Sometimes it's not realistic.
So, we're potentially looking at a menu
option there. Same with variances and
deviations. How can we perhaps allow
more deviations?
Now, keep in mind I'm saying all this
stuff. We recognize because this was my
job with the city for ever, but there
are visions in place, right? We have a
comprehensive plan and we have a central
Isiqua plan and we know what we want it
to look like. So, our goal is to do all
of this within the context of here is
still what we're trying to achieve to
keep the city's vision. So, that's not
going away.
Uh peer reviews through block
[clears throat] connectors are sometimes
a little unrealistic. Peer review, we're
trying to figure out what needs to be
peer-reviewed. It gets to be costly. We
don't have people inhouse to do that.
We've discovered through central Isaqua
that oh gosh, look, you pulled up the
pavement, there's a wetland right there.
And our, you know, our stepbacks for
some of these things are 150 feet or 75
feet, whatever it may be, which takes
away a lot of development space. So,
we're trying to figure out a happy place
where we can still improve what was
paved previously and yet allow
development to occur there.
Let's see. Uh, working on more
sustainable development standards, but
again, a menu
talking about what to do with structured
parking around the or structured or
retail frontage wrap requirement. Um,
we're trying to figure out what to do
with that. We've heard that's difficult.
Talking about multif family tax
exemptions, which most cities do, it
would be huge for getting affordable
housing and development back in here,
especially since we require zoning with
our inclusionary zoning. We are looking
at right sizing impact fees. Admittedly,
ours are quite a bit higher than a few
other cities and the potential use of AI
to aid in permitting. So, those are
topics that are all coming through here.
They're outlined by Q1 through Q3. I'll
have Emily send you the schedule and if
when you look at these, please um send
comments and or come to meetings because
you all are the experts and we would
love to have your opinions.
>> Excellent. Thank you.
Are there any other items of business or
announcements from staff?
>> Uh the last item is just the upcoming
schedule. As of now, not anticipating a
June meeting, but it looks like we might
be having July, maybe August for a um
larger PSSE substation expansion coming
before you guys. Um and then just a
couple things farther out in the
pipeline that we can't quite anticipate
yet. The second building of this one
will be coming in eventually. And um but
yeah, so as of now, it's looking like
just a July meeting next. and whatever
our next meeting is is when we will do
the chair and vice chair elections as
well.
>> Great. Thank you, Emily.
Any other comments from commissioner?
>> I would like to make a couple comments.
One is um welcoming Commissioner
Stancheek as a regular member and u
thank you for serving as an alternate
and we're
very pleased to have you as a regular
member. Thank you. Um, and the same time
I would like to um, not many people in
the audience, but I would like to
especially thank uh, Richard Sanford for
his eight years of service on the
commission. And I think maybe of anybody
I've ever served with, the most thorough
reviewer of projects that came through
um, for somebody that was a not from a
development real estate background. So
um, thank you Richard if you're
listening somewhere.
Thank you very much.
[laughter]
>> I hope not. There be no further business
before the commission. I adjourn the
meeting at 8:02 p.m. Thank you.