good ooh you think welcome to your third
or fourth Joint Commission meeting my
name for those of you I haven't met my
name is Kristen Lisa and I'm with the
development services department I'm a
Senior Planner in the long range
planning division and I work a lot with
PPC so tonight will be our final meeting
and we're going to go over the
highlights today especially for those
who are new who maybe haven't attended
one of these meetings yet we're going to
do a survey results overview Trish kind
of ran through it last time it's
included in your packet so hopefully
evolved on your homework and had a
chance to look at it and we'll just talk
about some of that tonight
I look just we're just going to go over
it quickly we'll talk about the mission
statement and the three problem
statements the strategies and actions
and the final report that we hope to
send which is Exhibit A in your packet
it's a very very rough draft but we just
want to talk about overarching ideas
that you think may be missing from the
report that helped tell the story of
what we have been through and what you
want counsel to know and then we'll talk
about next steps so we finish step one
back in September of last year we hired
a consultant who did it in existing
conditions inventory or statement for us
and then also did a picture of the 2040
housing and if we continue on the same
track what that might look like and then
right now we're in step 2 so after we
got the reports back we went and we
talked with we have a couple of council
work sessions and we also talked with
the school district service providers
seniors and providers for seniors small
businesses large businesses to help
identify gaps that they see when they
are out in the community and working
with our residents and and those who
work here but may not live here so we
took all that information to bring to
you for you to digest and help try and
come up with solutions which is what we
are doing tonight
step three will be a policy conversation
and we go back to Council on June 12th
so we'll do some discussion in-house and
then we
take that to policy or to City Council
and talk with them please feel free to
come to the meeting on June 12th and
contribute to that conversation the
survey results I'm not going to run over
all of them not going to do all the
demographics where people live and how
old they are and how much they pay
that's in your packet but some of the
highlights from that when we asked when
looking for a place to live what are
what are you move what are your more
important factors ranked from the most
important down to the least important
and I just put the top ones in there our
proximity to daily needs cost and safety
so these are things to consider when
we're talking about solutions and how
they fit with the problems as we see
them which of these statements reflects
us a quad a again most to least lack of
affordable housing few opportunities for
families particularly young families
lack of overall housing stock and lack
of small housing such as micro housing
or cottage housing which you have talked
about it's a possible solution 66
percent of people who answered this
question said that yes they know people
who have not been able to find a place
to live in it's across primarily because
of the price of how things so again that
goes to affordability and which are
successful outcomes in the next 20 years
there are a range of housing options for
households in all stages of life
new housing fits and preserves existing
character yet there's still a diversity
of housing types and architecture and
there's a preservation of environmental
features there are opportunities to age
in place housing for local employees
earning 25 to 60 thousand dollars a year
becomes more available and more single
housing Pervis for families is present
so I'm gonna let Jen take over from here
it was
right now actually okay hello my name is
Jen Davis Hayes I work here at the city
and economic development my staff the
economic vitality vitality Commission
and what we're passing around is
actually just a copy of these on one
page because the Oh actually for the
joint image I'm sorry for the Joint
Commission mission statement the the
what is passing out is actually the
problem statements so I didn't get a
reminder for those who were with us for
this whole process but to let the foot
new folks know basically the strategy
Housing Strategy mission statement we
developed is to encourage housing than
braces a city's character and
environment while providing a diversity
of choices to meet the needs of people
who choose to live work and play in
Issaquah if any of you have been
involved in developing mission statement
or vision statements you know you could
Sally we could probably spend another 20
years tweaking this but this gives a
general outline of what we as a group
set out on a mission to do to develop
strategy strategies that will dress this
and in that we created we talked about
three problem statements that were
identified and so that's what's being
passed out and we'll be referring to
those tonight as we talk about the
strategy because we want to remind
ourselves that those strategies any
strategies we talked about suggest
should address one of the problem
statements that we have identified so
the first problem statement is that
overall housing affordability in
Issaquah and the region have decreased
has decreased for households at all
levels and so some of the data that we
provided in previous data sets look at
the housing home prices as well as rents
have both increased quickly since 2012
they're less affordable for households
below the median income and low-income
housing is not being built near the
demand or the goal that we have for
ourselves so again we understand this is
not just about Issaquah but it's
throughout the region but that's overall
affordability has decreased at all
levels
problem statement number two is that so
individuals and families to not choose
four to choose to work and live in
Issaquah so we know that a lot of people
people make decisions where they choose
to live on a lot of different reasons
but you but if you would like to choose
to live in Issaquah it's really
challenging we we have data that shows
only 1500 just a little bit over 1500
people who live in this COIs also
working as a club and then looking at
what's called workforce housing so
that's between 60% ami and so ami is
area median income to 80% is not being
built at the level demanded and so those
are the folks that are not working in
their first job entry level but maybe in
a more have moved up and there may be in
a beginning managerial job or beginning
professional job it's really challenging
to find and so a really challenging to
find housing if you're making that much
money here in Issaquah what is the
current ami first ago
96 thousand and so this based on the
king cap for family four and its base
for King County as that's the and it
depends to what if you actually would go
into affordable housing as a family we
depend on your family size and then yeah
and then problems even number three
doesn't address affordability camor
about the diversity of demand and so we
noticed that there's a lot of demand
from downsizing baby boomers or
millenials for that one or two-bedroom
small home or even a condo and those are
not available at the the level of demand
and the interesting data I thought was
that we always think about as a place
for families which it is true but 30% of
Issaquah residents live alone yet only
10% of our units are one-bedroom or less
so it's a niche mismatch of size of
household and housing housing units that
are available so those are the three
problem statements that we developed
over time we have been talking about for
a while
any initial questions about those or
kind of thoughts we're not here to
adjust these or add more but those are
kind of what we've been developed so far
yes I can
that's of a question and more of a
comment we discussed this last kind
foreign thatch thing and if you think
about the middle class middle classes
people cannot buy a lot of houses here
anymore just because you know foreigners
I don't see that bullet point here so
right so this data was actually we I and
I should have mentioned this we had
hired a consultant to do basically a
needs assessment and assessment of
what's currently existing in Issaquah
looking at demographics etc and so this
data is not didn't address that but also
isn't a day that we've had found since
or have talked about since that actually
trend we are we want to make sure that
we note in our report and we can and
actually that was a comment that we'll
share from some commissioners who are
not unable to make the meeting tonight
that we will make sure it's addressed or
at least at least noted in our final
report so thank you so tonight why are
you here besides you you want to be
outside maybe but you're going to we're
here to put a final touches on the
strategies for our housing strategy for
Issaquah so the current strategies I
guess are you actually exhibited RB okay
so for those of you who printed out a
packet ignore the Exhibit B in your
package we have since updated to make it
hopefully easier to read and easier to
follow
so Exhibit B is actually a list of the
strategies that we currently have
discussed if on on the printout photos
are in here is xx exhibit XS sauce P so
there has been no changes as far as we
didn't eliminate things we just kind of
created again a format that's a little
easier to read we believe oh and then
okay so what so Exhibit B again or xx is
a most and are in our first discussion
about strategies we focus on affordable
housing and we kind of we know because
of the moratorium those are things that
we need to address more completely by
to September then the entire than all
the other strategies where some of the
strategies we made up saying let's
explore do this let's do more more
research on that and then our last
meeting we started to talk about the
broader strategies for housing for
housing it overall and so on this xx is
the what we've identified so far and so
the idea tonight is to take exhibit C
and so again that we've cleaned up as
well and so it looks like the copier
accidentally stapled them all together
but it's a two-page document looks like
so we'll be passing those out and so
basically what we want to do tonight is
to look at so the larger the larger
printouts the XX can I get one of those
please go anywhere looking at is again
this will be this is kind of our working
draft right this is our our will become
our final recommendations to City
Council so we want to refine and want to
look at these is there anything now that
we've been discussing this for for
meetings that we believe we should add
we should change we want to remove and
we were using Exhibit C as a resource to
look at other strategies that may
address the problem statement so that's
so again why you have a problem
statement so if there's a strategy that
you recommend look at how we want you to
you are talking about this we would like
you to address say this we I believe
this addresses strategy 1a or whatever
maybe or just one in general or number
two or number three because there's a
lot of great strategies as you can tell
there's so many options out there but in
order for us to be successful we just we
need to focus on how the problem
strategies statements we've identified
and develop strategies along there for
instance the we want to also take note
of trends that we want to include in the
final report and understand that what we
do right now is not diving to the detail
so we do not need to figure out that
this housing is exactly
can be for 30% ami and it's going to
provide job trading services and this
and that we are looking for the higher
levels general strategies and that will
that work will be done in a later time
so are there any questions about what
we're doing here and the other thing we
want to pass out actually is a few
commissioners that were unable to make
the meeting tonight but they did send in
comments and so what we did is we cut
and paste exactly as I wrote it so and
then put who said it so I categorize
them by topic and so not it's not always
going to go exactly to what's on here
but these are just voices that aren't
here but it has something to say again
when it says at the top this does not
mean that these are any more important
than any other voice that's spoken
tonight about this and sometimes when
you write something doesn't come across
exactly how the full nuance so just take
that in mind as you look at that but
there they did provide some input on
some of the things we've talked about so
I guess what I'd like to do first is to
look at the strategies one through five
and again these were identified in the
past and are there are there any
concerns or inserts in editing or
removing any of these five strategies so
again if you look on your exhibit xx it
gives you a little bit more details from
the pros and cons and kind of where
we've got data to back those so for
instance the accessory dwelling units
citywide that is and so those are the
mother-in-law apartments the apartment
above in your house or above your garage
so trying to make those more easier to
build in the city looking at that we
believe that that would provide some
some different housing sizes as well as
some affordability because it would be
less than a full home you have to run
out and right now as you can see the
city has about 40 of these permitted
they are currently lab but we do is
explore to see if there are some other
regulations that we should be looking at
that may prohibit builders from pursuing
this option so one on that have we
looked into it all considering tiny
homes for Adu options and when you say
look into tiny homes as an Adu option
meaning though tiny homes are mobile all
of them do we have anything that
prohibits tiny homes and could we kind
of consolidate some kind of code around
that that would encourage it for ad you
use yeah I'm looking at the planners in
the room to find out if we have a need
it prohibits tiny homes because I know
that was a trend that we have did mark
right now they need to be connected to
sewer and so the tiny homes that we've
seen are not connected all to sewer but
that's something we can explore but you
can't have a detached ad you correct in
front of tiny elements like this on like
a triangle but it has we ad you has to
be connected to sewer set right
everything has to be an actress or yes
yes so that is definitely something we
didn't scoff specifically but we can
look at that as well
I think that is an option that that was
discussed as last meeting looking at as
an option so thank you another quick
comments a quick comment last time we
talked about and it's in red under the
pros we talked about building ad use to
condo standard oh maybe I'm getting
mixed up you think maybe apartments to
condos Sanders
that's mm-hmm that's okay no yep yep but
but I mean I kind of gets the read the
FIR the second bullet point there where
it says it spot is it possible for
builders to build with future ad use in
mind so allowing them to convert their
basement into an ad you and thinking
about that so that's yeah there's if
there's a way to encourage or even
require some of those things will be
able look at that a question for number
three proposed housing lovie
have we looked at mello-roos does that
make sense for our town
have we looked at I'm sorry I didn't
hear mello-roos what not sort of funding
in California is very popular work lots
of the utility fees and so on that are
normally be passed on to the developers
here or actually passed on to residents
moving in so then the residents are
actually responsible for paying Mello
Roos for 10-15 years do you know what
that is I'm going to invite Arthur
Sullivan afternoon flight hi Brougham
Arthur Sullivan program manager arch
we've been here for other nights
that's essentially what King County has
done with their sewer system connection
where you pay for I don't know if it's
10 or 15 years and you have an option
you can pay it up front but it's set up
to be paid over X number of years so
that is used right now in this county by
Metro for wastewater so would that be a
possibility to use something like that
to help offset the most housing levy
from another bar oh if we have a problem
with affordable housing obviously the
clientele that's moving into is a cloth
has means would be able to pay for
mello-roos
so rather than put the developer or
rather than put the housing levy on
current residents put it on the newer
residents that are moving into half who
have the means to pay for some of that
so that would feel like an impact fee
and in this state there is legislation
under the growth management act as to
what type of impact fees can be charged
to new developments and affordable
housing is explicitly precluded from
being able to be having an impact fee
that that that is allowed to use for
impact fees Melrose would not be able to
go the earnest that the state of
California thing but the idea of an
upfront new development paying some type
of impact is allowed with limit
in this state and affordable housing is
not one of this we might be able to use
mello-roos to pay for other things and
then the city could then use that money
to pay for affordable housing I mean I'm
going to avoid the term mello-roos that
I'm not exactly if you're saying at the
California situation you have to sort of
if you're saying new development pay for
some of the services or needs of a
community resulting from growth if
that's what you're referring to let's
refer to vector than this stay Pacific
we call that impact fees and the things
the state legislation is very clear
about what they're that can be and
there's processes for establishing those
and whether or not you can use a
financing system where as paid overtime
or upfront that I'm not exactly sure for
impact fees Metro used it for a utility
hookup fee which is a little bit
different than an impact fee but the
idea of new develop a four things I'm
trying to figure out what is the answer
is so that we can acknowledge that and
how it relates to affordability is when
I'm struggling with a little bit cools
police to permits schools are allows and
police are allowed and fire are allowed
and right now the city does for a number
of those have impact fees they do waive
those for affordable housing that's a
current policy of the city state law
allows that to be waived for housing
that meets certain tests can be waived
and those have been waived by a number
of cities including ASA qua for a number
of those impact fees so we could
increase the fees asked on to not the
developer passed on to the new resident
coming in for some of those impacts and
we could take a bucket of money from
other funds and move that towards the
affordable housing or that's where we'd
have to do legal research to see whether
or not that would be interpreted as
having to fall within the rules of
charging impact fees and if so there's a
process under state law and about how
you can determine you can't just
arbitrarily set them wherever you want
to set them there's a process that
cities have to go through
so not to diminish the idea that this
can be something that's used I don't
know how it translates over to an
affordable housing fund other than as
you're saying the city is more
comfortable using other revenue sources
for affordable housing because this is a
source of helping to pay for some of
those things otherwise pay for out of a
source you would tip that you might use
from more general fund type sources
adding more fees on to new homeowners
increases the cost of the housing for
those homeowners so when we're talking
about affordable housing we also want to
make sure that the next layer up is able
to afford the house and the more impact
fees that you put on to that just going
to add an increase in value so you might
help them but you're hurting them that
can't do that and that could very well
be true but that's also a debatable
question as to if impact fees are
directly translated over to a house cost
houses are sold on the market for
whatever owner can get for them if if
they know up front as I've heard develop
it they know up front there is an impact
fee they look at what they think they
can sell a home for they may offer a
little less for a piece of land if they
have to but it may get passed through it
may not Builders generally will sell a
house for whatever the market will bear
and when they have cost
they won't build unless they can figure
out a way to have everything balanced
out so it can have some kind of impact
on the development in general so that is
a consideration that needs to be thought
about as well I just wanted to mention
that we now get into the details but we
do we do have a policy to have new
development paid for the impacts and so
that is through the impact fee and all
those uses or the fire police schools
parks even non mobility and another
transportation do have impact fees that
we just recently went through and did
analysis on and have actually raised
them and last year and a half and so we
can we can have get some information to
you and
kind of look into that and we'll we'll
see if there's anything else again rent
around how California does that that
would be pertinent here and looks like
he's given our development services
director is going to say add something
to that yes I thought maybe your DSD has
both up so Ron I think what this one was
is you know the strategy here again was
there was no silver bullet right and so
if we're going to really deal with this
issue you know a certain percentage of
the of the incentives need to come from
the development community and a certain
amount needs to come from the city and
this one was really aimed at should a
certain amount come from existing
residents in a community should the
existing community help new people get
into the community because of the lack
of affordable housing so this one was
really intended not to go against the
developers but to really go against the
existing community kind of like the
transportation levee that that was just
brought forward last year last year
right so so I don't again testing your
guys's empathy for this one I mean this
one was really should you all help bring
down the cost of housing so that they
can be more affordable for community
this is really loud I am empathetic to
pain for that out of my own pocket
the idea was Mello Roos might be a
strategic tool to further enhance our
affordability target additional leverage
but that's all is just so with the
wonder of the technology world we're
able to look at Mello Roos so I have a
little more familiarity I would still
not want anything said now to not be
followed up if you're interested
California has a limitation on property
taxes and it's a very severe called prop
13 if any of you are familiar with
California property tax rules Mello ruse
was a way through voter approved
initiative to exceed the prop 13 limits
and so basically what
describing is can we use property taxes
somehow to fund something and the answer
to that is yes and that's one of the
options you have in front of you the
rules that govern in this state how you
raise property taxes are different we
don't you know we have and so your
comment is sort of along the lines of
the entry gear of do we do a property
tax levy which is go to voters to
approve something so we have more
revenue and it's dedicated for a
specific purpose in mello-roos it's
dedicated for certain infrastructure and
it was a way to get around severe
limitations under the general property
tax rules because we have those
limitations and that's why I was
thinking that might be great and what
I'm saying is you have also the right
through state law to increase property
taxes up to a certain amount and your
lid is a lot higher than it is in
California under prop 13 for base and so
you do actually see that idea laid out
here and what Keith was describing in
that up and that I don't know which
number it is number 3 so that's
essentially doing what you're describing
are there any other thoughts about the
housing levy I'm not asking you to vote
for house Mojave tonight but any
thoughts would it would it be helpful to
have something that ties the other
number 2 and number 9 I think and a
housing levy that kind of pulls them
together something along the lines of
just throwing this out for an example
but something where the city provides
funds purchase and released back housing
for people that want to age in place
that are meant on fixed income then
allows people to age in place then also
allows the state to acquire housing that
then when that resident is no longer
renting it from the city can then become
mobilizing rather for the people you're
getting to exactly the type of detail it
would have to define because I don't
know how many people would just vote
just to give the give somebody money
without knowing exactly so that's if we
did a housing levy we would use our
strategy to really define where how
we're going to spend the money and I
believe would have to almost define like
percentage-wise you know where how that
money would be spent in a different
category the way I look at you can do
three different things with with a
housing levy you can build new housing
and with for instance similar to stuff
we're doing with Tod and then a
component of you know up 200% that can
be affordable you can preserve existing
housing by using vouchers or cutting
property taxes so we're the season
acquiring the housing but subsidizing so
that can become affordable then you can
acquire just a housing stock and then
becomes city city owned or owned by not
for profit
I think that whether or not we want to
do we know one two three or some
combination of them okay any thoughts on
that from the Commissioner other
commissioners um I would also rely on
like big businesses to contribute to
this like one aspect is like for if you
are an employee of Costco or any other
big businesses in Issaquah you want your
employees to be residing in Issaquah and
make make make today work on time avoid
the transportation chaos and whatnot
it's an incentive that we are offering
these businesses like Costco by
providing that affordable home to their
employee if they can someway compensate
for their employees for affordable
houses that the city is providing for
them be a good addition on you know get
some additional support from big
businesses you suggestin perhaps a tax
or fee that would be added to that or to
business not tax or a fee like let's say
the person the employee to which we are
giving them and some affordable housing
whatever is the market housing price if
the employers can offset the provider
that really guard it down for them grab
it affordable for them okay these big
businesses can offset that price okay so
it's almost like they have maybe a
set-aside number units and they can
subsidize to bring their employees in
okay yeah I think I think there there
should be a conversation around who we
target for the affordable housing and I
think the example you provided in terms
of employees but I think also looking at
any common examples like schoolteachers
mm-hmm they can afford to live here and
whether or not we want to take the
existing bank of whatever affordable
housing that a housing love it would
create whether
that's just available on a first-come
first-serve people that are income
eligible or whether you would want to
set aside those units specifically for
state city employees or school or school
employees I think that I think that's a
really interesting discussion I wasn't
what the community values yeah yeah I
was just looking to Arthur so no we had
last time talk about fair housing rules
around that and I know if there's
anything you want to just comment with
that to the first comment about
employers 15 with housing there's two
examples out there that give you sort of
a bracket of the range of things that
might be talked about one is there some
programs a lot in the some in the
Chicago area where employers help
employees buy homes so they help with
the down payment so that it was a way to
help bring it down and usually what they
find they do it and they do it a lot
with hospitals and other employees who
have a high training class from turnover
and so the the attraction or the appeal
the pitch that's made the companies is
it saves them money in the long run and
then it they use often the company set
it up that if you stay in your home ten
years or something and you stay with the
company ten years they'll forgive that
you know sort of it's like a down
payment assistance the other example is
down in the San Francisco Bay Area
there is a public fund like just like
you were talking about this levy idea
and what they have done is the
manufacture it's called the Silicon
Valley manufacturing group is the public
sector has gotten together with the
private sector and the and they've
created a fund that is used to fund
affordable housing Monday that comes
from public sources but some of that is
also coming from local companies so they
just give the money into that fund
source and then there's a board that you
know they come up with all the criteria
that you're describing to sort a locate
those funds so those are a couple of
different ways employers have gotten
involved with dealing with housing needs
in their community and then there's more
extreme cases that you go back further
where companies actually build housing
for employees I mean if you go back
England did that in a number of
communities and some companies in the
u.s. actually did that as well so that's
actually an even more extreme case
and then when you can speak to this the
second half of that so the second one is
you definitely have to think about fair
housing issues and it gets pretty
complex and the other element to is is
that if you look at the history of the
resources that cities have made
available they're a small piece of that
overall funding and so when that happens
you're using a lot of other funds from
federal and national or state sources so
there's the challenges at times related
to court cases about how explicit you
can be about prioritizing or setting
aside but we have in times over the
years try to you know we try to
work with ways like heavy advertising to
local employers and things like that and
it's a shifting issue and so it's one
that I think is worth keeping your eye
over time because not a lot of people
raise that issue and see that connection
if there's something the city provides
or it can be looking to because one
problem that I keep hearing from friends
is that apartment complexes complex
places in the city that used to have
section 8 families are being sold to new
management or owners and then section 8
which is affordable housing is being
eliminated there's something in the city
or in all the discussions we've had that
has addressed that so I guess that would
I will consider that preserving
affordable housing
right yeah okay and so I don't know um
yeah okay coming up I'm looking at the
strategies we've identified so far and I
don't believe we have anything
specifically to that except for a few
would well it doesn't say number two is
that's the point and I'm looking trying
to look on the strategic matrix that was
the black and white copy if there's
something more specific but what you
just described is it would be addressing
number two okay there's two types of
vouchers this is federal assistance
where residents pay a third of their
income and the government pays the
difference between that and
like that rent one is where it gets tied
to a building and it stays with that
building over time the other is when a
resident gets it and they try to find an
apartment in the community for the
former that has been the number one
priority of the cities in East King
County we had about 550 units owned
privately in East King County 500 of
those have been preserved by getting
them sold to nonprofits or getting that
owner to refinance with us and other
public funders and agreed to keep
there's only one building left in all of
East King County and it is in Issaquah
and we're watching it but that has been
a highest priority of the cities in
Eaton County for 20 years and we've had
overall pretty incredible success we've
lost 20 units through sale on the open
market
out of those 554 the vouchers what might
be worth considering and some cities
have done this in their preservation
language is they acknowledge that the
vouchers where residents have to find
units can you do things to try to make
it so that people can use vouchers in
your community because there's usually a
cap on how much rent they contain if
your rents go up in the community it's
harder you know it can be harder for
people to find Salters in their
community so some cities and their
housing strategies in the preservation
section have acknowledged explicitly and
called out the point you've made more
but it's more related to the what are
called the mobile vouchers it's not so
much the building base points well the
the situation's I've been hearing from
different families in the community that
they're not accepting vouchers anymore
at all there I'm not following the
question the apartment complex right
this X family X Y Z families have
vouchers or either of the situations
that you just explained from from
qingcheng to pay for housing right they
sell the complex say 60 units a little
bit here and there then they don't
accept any more affectionate or vouchers
right and they increase the rent right
and it's happening more and more
intensively
correct so well can we do this - ok so
those two things you're describing there
the first is an owner
I just don't want people with vouchers
in my building
the second is the rent in your community
have gone up so high that people with
vouchers can't pay they're not allowed
to rent in those units because the rents
are too high and there's a cap on what
they're allowed to pay for the first
issue what is out there and some - you
may have read about this even it's
through in Federal Way and I think all
bur in the last year is they're saying
they're passing local ordinances that
say it's called source of income
discrimination and they're passing
ordinance that says you can't
discriminate with someone because of the
source of income they're using ie
section aid or other assistance when you
are looking at somebody for
qualifications to move in now you can
and in East King County King County as
adopted that kind of ordinance Bellevue
Redmen and Kirkland also have adopted
those types of ordinances that however
doesn't mean that the owners rents are
still too high people still won't
necessarily get into those units with
their vouchers okay so what I'm saying
is like one of the things that's out
there that we're working with the
Housing Authority now is we have tried
to find ways to get people with vouchers
like when we have a land-use created
affordable unit and it's affordable at
80 percent immediate networks and so
we're looking at working with the
Housing Authority to see if we can get
people with vouchers in some of the
buildings even new buildings in the
units that are at least a little below
market because of land use requirements
so that's like some of the cities are
putting language and can we find some
ways to make it a little bit easier for
people with vouchers to be in our
community and you might leave it at that
there and the follow up could be either
the source of income or it could be
finding ways to get units that have rent
levels that are within the means of
what's about your people with vouchers
compact discs or currently have a
discrimination income ordinance I do not
believe so
would that be good to call out as a
specific option and within our within
the recommendations where other things
and if I remember correctly I think
Seattle was also looking at something
about you have to accept people in the
order that they apply so you can't kind
of skip over the first three people that
apply with vouchers in order to accept
somebody who doesn't have a voucher and
that's also discriminatory as well
that's intended for all renters not as
much for the section eight but that's
intended for all renters have sort of
level the playing field and maybe it's
racial discrimination all forms of
discrimination they're trying to avoid
alright any other comments on any of
these the five that are on the screen
here
overall I want a little bit of head
nodding or wagging this way that if we
move forward these you know without
hearing to basically take one of these
off or arguing for changing it these
will end up being developed more and put
into the housing strategy we we talked
to council about where's exclusionary
zoning in bonus density is that on this
for details okay thank you I was going
to say number four is really important
transit oriented development is a way to
kind of cut costs for a family household
by proximity to transit or other
mobility options to either get to their
jobs or to other communities or services
if any of you who are following the
sound transit three discussions it was
stated that a individual without having
a car and having to be reliant on a car
could save annually up to ten thousand
dollars well that is obviously a cost
saving that could help towards housing
and then that multi-family tax exemption
is really important to help keep the
cost of housing down as new product is
developed so I definitely would be in
support of something
lines up to 12 years because it's a way
to bring in additional product to help
support that need I'll echo the comments
on Tod I think and I'm in the common are
the previous meeting for the translation
plan I think it might be helpful to put
in some language or a comment about
working with Sound Transit which there
with the news and transit station I
think the foundation 3 package
specifically includes funding for Tod
and given that we have a we have a
station coming it might be good to
definitely start looking towards that
and providing the city side of funding
or to maximize that benefit if a when
that gets built yes we're actually
planning a Tod right now okay that one's
for that one no one's adjacent to the
current Pterodactylus that are exactly
but yeah so we waited after them and
trying to a continue on that and be with
the Larios it makes a lot of sense once
we know where that station will be that
stationary planning disaster until 2024
so but we but obviously doing a little
bit of the work now around Tod will
become expert scible you know
potentially has additional product yeah
I also wanted to suggest with Tod is
there any way the city can pressure
metro to give us an orca card machine
for the city there is not one in our
city people who want to have an orca
card or load money onto it they can't do
it at transit center they have to go to
a grocery store first
how are they going to get to the grocery
store when they live right next to the
Transit Center it just doesn't work but
is there anything the city can do to
pressure Metro for that well well look
at that as part of Tod again yeah
useless if you can't get a card to get
on the bus
yeah so we can also maybe look at the
Tod that we're working with the
developers key that makes sense and in
their thoughts every second on one day a
lot of the things we pointed out is you
know the rents have increased quite a
lot and rents are really high in this
area and between the point came on the
action items between one and nine they
helped me understand how which one
specifically
addresses ghrelin pour the rent so so
number one could it's not a guarantee
but accessory dwelling units against
typically smaller size so it would be
some lower rent right support
preservation of existing affordable
housing so then those rents in whatever
method we do wouldn't raise us quickly
or be as expensive as other rental units
I think probably I think the first five
deal with with affordable housing and so
I think all of those would because
inclusionary zoning basically says that
you must include a certain percentage of
affordable housing and as Keith
mentioned before not one of these
strategies is going to be a silver
bullet we're not going to be able to
solve the problem with one or two or
even ten or twenty but it's looking at
different different stakeholders that
can help be part of the conversation and
part of the solution and so that that is
more on the developments developers side
so allowing them to build maybe another
level if they provide some affordable
housing they worked on a plan to provide
yeah and I know I think the number eight
which is on the third page talking about
diverse housing models to college
cottages and duplexes and multiplexers
again having smaller different size
units you know potentially you think
turns into or relates to how much they
can even charge but again it's not
guaranteed to be affordable housing but
it's a it gives a spectrum of
affordability
Oh have you thought about gun control at
all I know Washington State used to have
it it got repealed in 1981 because we
had a Republican Senate and the
lobbyists paid money it's not completely
outside real most discussion right good
I'm looking at Arthur for rent control
or we I know we talked about this last
time as well
prohibited is prohibited by the state
yeah so I guess he's saying go in just
state and get unperson to actually allow
it again and that's something we could
look at you know I think it's a pretty a
pill battle and but that's my personal
opinion not my legal lobbying opinion so
I've got one question here for number
nine we're supporting housing options
and services to enables seniors to stay
in their homes and neighborhoods also
they're potentially asking seniors to
move to condos as a step maybe as a
shutdown most of the contact I think all
condo is now being developed in Issaquah
our multiple story and seniors have
struggled with stairs so maybe we want
to have a percentage of this a
single-story units for those with
disabilities well I would I would
disagree on that one I mean I want to
live in a condo it has an elevator and I
would say half the people in my building
are people that have retired and and
I've have have moved down and then I
think also I would I don't think if you
have an opportunity to build a
multi-story building and you really know
one story buildings if someone doesn't
have to walk up the stairs I think
that's a missed opportunity that not
referring to the actually building being
single story
oh just hang on units on the ground for
Wow okay so I'm sorry but not having a
townhome stacked you could have a
townhome stack as long as you have maybe
an elevator or something or or high-rise
but single storey units sure sure yeah
yes
thank you so you have on here
legislation to support condominiums and
those that conversation was focusing
right now the market is building
townhomes you know in terms of a
building type and not building flat
multi-story flats and your comments when
I clarify if there were multi-story
buildings that are condominiums but they
are like elevators sort of common entry
would that address the point you're
making okay so then I would sort of
argue that the condominium legislation
we're talking about is to support the
forms of condos that we haven't been
seen which are the stats flat types
which would have the side beneficial
beneficiate beneficiary of maybe serving
seniors who want to move out would that
cover your comment okay number six up
there and what we discussed before and
you can read a little more that the
several years ago the liability laws
changed and there's quite a few entities
that are continuing to talk to our
legislators about changing that because
it has resulted in again townhomes and
multifamily rental versus ownership
opportunities so I have a general
question I don't see in any of the nine
homelessness showing up specifically and
maybe it's not exactly the right place I
think in a previous meeting we did talk
about sort of the soul and of a full
range of everybody everybody in it it
might be so maybe just maybe one
question maybe it is in there and I'm
just not seeing it and maybe a solution
would be I noticed on the strategy
matrix there's you know category of that
like special needs and seniors or
address kind of in one place so maybe
nine could actually be it if needed nine
could be expanded to kind of just deal
with special needs generally including
seniors and homelessness could be
addressed in there I don't know it's
just an idea but maybe it's in there
somewhere else Chris I'm not sure yeah I
don't think we are addressing
homelessness and
or categories specifically do you think
Martha it would be problem statement
three though just worry about using our
dollars leverage of the public dollars
those often come with requirements or
you get more points so we increase
likelihood of funding if you designate a
certain percentage of units for folks
exiting or coming out of homelessness
but so we wouldn't see that level of
detail at the strategy level but still
additional idea to point furniture
yeah then I drink or everything so I
know I know Trish Mensa number three
which is a levy and again could be in
and out there
no problem statement three oh that's a
housing diversity that right address
that as well right or is a funding
resource so what if folks about think
about number nine and so I know we have
a comment from one of our commissioners
about expending resources support more
housing options specifically for seniors
doesn't believe that makes sense and I
think we just learned and I just learned
today that's actually the percentage
wise of our community seniors as a
percentage have decreased so while we
see a lot of senior housing and I think
wow there's a lot more seniors here
there are more seniors here but there's
also a lot more other people here so so
what he worried that folks think about
expanding number nine to include not
just seniors but special needs
homelessness another seems to kind of be
broader and again we're not getting down
to the details of what exactly and how
tonight but it will address that that
broader population that you're right
that in problem statement number three
addresses excuse me could that include
assistant leaving for disabled and
handicaps
well yeah as you noticed numbers seven
eight and nine are in red because those
were added at last meetings so they
haven't been as vetted and you know
maybe maybe not have had as much time do
you think about those so let's look at
those directly so number seven is
looking at looking at zoning codes to
accommodate single room occupancy SROs
or mini suites and multi-family zones
and so this is a little bit of the
shared spaces
oddments those type of things I'm going
to folks think about that concept so I
think if we're looking at thirty percent
of our residents currently living alone
we have to question whether or not
they're living alone in current housing
stock which only eight percent is single
bedroom if they're choosing to live in a
two-bedroom unit because they want the
extra space or whether they're choosing
to live in it because they want to live
in Escalon not the only housing stock if
it's the former than creating SROs and a
pod mints and things like that isn't
really going to appeal to the type of
person who is currently living in
Issaquah necessarily so I'm not sure how
much that I would choose as a direction
to go but I think tying that in or at
least being associated with the bonus
density and the ACLU's inclusionary
zoning in five and just encouraging
smaller units in that way rather than
necessarily SROs would be one way to
look at it what others think
I think I'd argue that the kind of
people that want to live in an SRO are
not currently living in Issaquah because
it's just not an option to so I think
even if a lot of the people that are
living in vital um by themselves and
perhaps the detached house because they
own it I think I think the people that
would be taking advantage of the SRO is
moving into equi rather than people
currently us because moving from one
type of housing talk to the other I
think either way I think it's a good
thing because I think we need we need to
president any things regionally we need
to be adding more housing stock of all
times and after I was simply one of many
types of housing that that that the city
needs to be adding what kind of
incentive could be provided for seniors
because some of them live in a two or
three-bedroom house because they've been
living there all their lives in ISA for
when he was affordable but what kind of
what kind of incentive could be offered
to them to me moving to smaller
apartments making those houses available
for bigger families okay because there's
an abundance in other places or programs
that have encouraged seniors to
basically downsize so I think then you
you have to have the opportunity to that
unit that works for them as we talked
about with single story or single living
story living space or maybe having that
extra bedroom still so that family can
come visit but not four extra bedrooms
right so we can look at what programs
exist for that we haven't done that
research to know I think that makes a
really good point and it's not
necessarily I think something I would
envision the city doing but maybe
there's an opportunity with the local
nonprofit that you know you see online
the volunteer connection sites
perhaps there's a way to connect
roommate because if you think about if
you are senior citizen or living on your
own there's a lot of potential fear and
a lot of work or just not understanding
what the rules are to finding a roommate
and it's there was a group that could
facilitate and make that easy and safe I
think a lot more people if it was
visible might take advantage of that so
that's a way to open up households that
have rooms it could be used in
benefit from that merit accommodation
good actually second or she almost took
the words out of my mouth my next
comment was on as far as the single the
SROs if we build too many SROs if not as
the efficient use of space as a
two-bedroom necessarily because a
two-bedroom has one sometimes a one bath
and one kitchen the two people living in
it so you could have roommate situation
which didn't gives you a more a better
affordable housing because if you're
paid or rents of us a thousand dollars a
month for a studio or single single room
and you're paying 1,500 a month for a
two-bedroom rent the two-bedroom up to a
roommate split the right and you're
actually no more affordable
clarification on that though but on sros
that's different than a studio though an
SRO is where you might have
oh just a room and then you're still
having in common space where the shower
and the kitchen is correct that's their
SS rows are different because you're
correct to make a studio you're
repeating bathrooms and you're repeating
ovens but if in an SRO it's literally
just a room with a bed in a closet yeah
yeah correct much more much more of a
dorms types with exact I was almost more
of a co-op along those lines
and although NRS Row is currently
allowed in the square so what would let
me put this another way what's that
what's the current cap on bedrooms you
can have in a common ended in a single
dwelling unit I don't know that we know
that off oh maybe he knows yeah I know
we we include I think five or six
unrelated people of the group home right
so the odds are most cities you could
probably find a way to build them it
just might get really expensive to deal
with all the codes and everything that
go with them and so it may make it
impractical from a marketing you know
from like what you're going to rent the
units for so it's it can be a subtle
kind of thing is to what you might do to
accommodate an SRO
but most cities I think have provisions
that allow various forms of you know
that do allow but we find the actual s
where you've described the market
generally isn't doing they are doing
more maybe the kitchen is shared but
there's still a microwave in the unit
and so people might not need it and
that's what we're seeing built on the
east side right now is they aren't
considered exactly studio units but each
unit you don't have a microwaving of a
very small bathroom and you might only
have one sink for both the bathroom in
the kitchen kind of space and that's
what we're seeing the market at least
the one person who's building them in
these King County the way they're doing
it the pure SRO where you just have a
room and then you share a bathroom and
you share that's something we have to
look into to see if that to what extent
that's allowed and the way that one
builder first started doing it is
essentially he did make it like a six
bedroom house and you're allowed to have
up to six people and so you can do it
that way
and so that's another route that people
can go but we're finding that when
someone is building something explicitly
they're not doing something quite like
what you described they're doing
something that's a morph between a
studio and what you described a couple
comments whispering rapid I think one I
think it might be helpful along this
that I think the city should look at
what not make sense to clarify or zoning
try to explicitly allow or not allow
that I because I know I mean there's
there's little apartment boom and
Seattle to three years ago there's
basically they figured out the loopholes
and the loopholes got closed
I would actually are going to ever think
it's going to go the other way
specifically allow us or rose but then
make sure that's very clear what we mean
by it what we what we want to allow and
about what scale and and what so I
wanted just to add to your conversation
at the last meeting what I believe I
heard saying is if you are looking at
that the idea was not necessarily
universally in the city but if it is
something where it's a special kind of
zoning look at where you do it to make
sure it's very transit rich it's like oh
yeah definitely no I think SROs is
generally think
I'm generally squeamish when I say oh we
only want a certain cap hasn't one spot
I think this is very much something
where it's appropriate to allow it only
in specific sections of the city I think
will be great there within transit which
parts the cities we clarify our zoning
and make it very clear to developers
that yes this is welcome because I think
in to wander into cliche I think I read
a lot about how Millennials of which I'm
one are very much into that kind of like
coal living space and you see it a lot
of places like Chicago New York and I
don't see why I don't see why is it well
couldn't have I mean it's not something
you would see built everywhere I think
it certainly it would be booked a piece
of the puzzle I think it's something
that we should explore and perhaps
embrace I'm sorry I imagine think one
point on that is so it's a great thought
and and here's the deal is most builders
don't like to be guinea pigs and so just
allowing it doesn't necessarily and
likely won't mean it's going to happen
because what's going to happen is most
builders will say well there's no tested
market and is a quad to do an SRO so I'm
not going to go ahead and finance that
kind of project because I don't know
what kind of return I'm going to get on
my investment so if if this group really
thinks that's an important piece of the
puzzle then it goes beyond just look
making sure that the code would allow it
it's how do you then facilitate one to
happen so that the rest of the builders
can then see whether or not it's
marketable or not right I mean because
that's part of the puzzle is they're
going to look and see what kind of
return as Arthur mentioned there's been
there's been I think from last time you
said there was a builder in Bellevue
that did one and then there's the one in
Redmond that's currently working on on a
version but if we see this as being a
housing type that's truly important for
our diversity needs and desires then
it's going to go beyond just making sure
the code allows it it's how do you then
facilitate getting somebody to actually
try it yeah but I think the first tip is
to make sure that the code allows it I
think you that that needs come first and
then I think I'd also argue that if it
works in Bellevue in Redmond it's going
to come to Issaquah as long as the
region keeps growing it's going to
happen eventually and I don't I don't
think I'm
some are going to disagree with you
Keith I don't think the city means
actually go out it's way to facilitate a
certain type of development a message
needs to allow it and as long as the
region keeps growing at the pace it's
growing eventually some developer is
going to say well if it works in Bothell
it works in Kirkland it's going to work
in Issaquah because the cities aren't
that different and once those are the
ones those students get built out the
growth the growth is the growth is
coming here one way or another I think
you're right that going forward a
facilitator might have might accelerate
it and have that type of housing stock
being built a few years earlier but I
think simply allowing and clarifying I
think if you allow it they will come
I think John did my in my opinion Arthur
a quick question for you about you
talked a lot about the developer in
Redmond doing this time and time and
time and these basically finishing one
starting another there's something in
Redmon's ordinances that has enticed him
to do that that we could do here maybe
bring him here so I guess the question
I'm going to put out to the group
tonight given your overall goal is the
purpose of what you're doing here is
setting things to be researched in more
detail so whether or not we answer every
question tonight if that's relevant the
key is is it important enough we should
look at it now the quick answer is I
believe probably a primary thing that
was important for them is parking but
I'm not absolutely positive but when I
talk to city staff recently to clarify
what's the difference between a studio
what they're building and what's the
difference in the code one of their
comments was how they look at parking
there might be other things too but
that's and I'm not sure how far they
went with that but just to illustrate
it's been let me rephrase my comments I
do think would be worthwhile as Key says
to look into what we could do to
facilitate SRO construction okay okay do
any opinions against or counter to that
again we're researching and part of
maybe it's completely we have the same
codes and it's just not happening yet
and so talking having those
conversations okay
sir please thank you thank you voice yes
so that so as I mentioned to Lincoln
under the housing type says he says that
again linking it to the Tod should be
pursued and maybe even going farther and
incentivize and then I'm actually a
Ethan's comment was more about he and I
we believe it it's like he would be
opposed and I think part of it is
changing his comments are about changing
the character and if we talk about
keeping in a more urban dense areas it's
the quad versus haven't been go out into
you know a space that's currently more
rural and unattached amenities he might
have a different a little slightly
different perspective on that nor play
devil's advocate and say that SRO is I
think because it's a really new thing it
could be a fad and we should got that by
researching whether or not people who
live in our sorrows actually like them
before we bring them into our towns we
may be bringing something into our town
that isn't sustainable
okay well gotten and look at that as a
as far as research as a trend as well
yeah I was just going to say the same
thing this kind of research what you
know with the turnover how long do they
actually stay there or you know just I
feel like there just needs to be a
little bit more data to support that
because a part of me does feel that it
could be a trend just kind of like these
time homes and everything where is it
really going to sustain in the long run
economically or is it just because we
have such a need for affordable housing
the businesses soaring to that so I'd
like to just put something out there for
you to be aware of on that front
Bellevue helped to build or build 125
years ago and the person who built them
the logic he used he was a California
developer who noticed that in many urban
areas you have old hotels that get
converted to housing for low cost of
employees with low salaries and when he
looked at where growth was occurring now
and job growth was occurring you don't
have old hotels and so he saw this as a
model towards creating a form of housing
especially for retail workers and other
types of workers single workers and
communities that fills a void that will
be that probably there a long term and
he's been doing this for over 30 years
so I think it's good the research is
like you know but in general it's
creating a form of housing that an urban
area is sort of created naturally that's
to do in an area like if the quad
because you don't have older hotels or
old houses being split up into five or
six units and things like that so just
put that out there for some perspective
um I also just wanted to add I think
that it would be important to do the
research about if there any sort of
research to support whether it's a fad
or not but also SRO is a new term but
there even in the wording of the of the
strategy it covers other terms that have
been around a lot longer like boarding
home or co-op so it's another it's a new
term but I think the concept has been
around and been in communities a long
time good point can I Segway to number
eight yeah there something maybe to look
into in terms of whether or not the city
once to allow what it would look like to
allow conversion of detached homes into
a boarding house type set up and debate
you know taking Oh two or three story to
poem and turn it into a duplex triplex
whether that's allowed of where we want
to allow that in particular like old
town where there's a lot of
single-family homes one ought to make
sense to you know enable converting
those to more of an apartment size set
up and this might just be clarifying
question duplex multiplex does that
include row houses would that be a
distinct building type I'm looking to my
planners again it just means more than
to like a triplex or you know I read a
lot about Monroe houses as being a part
of the missing middle is there any value
and adding that to numerators that
covered by multiplex I think well and I
think it's the same thing okay if you if
you find some distinction there there's
no reason not to if you would like to
seems like multi plus duplex is the
number and then grow home is more how
they're okay yeah yeah yeah Barbara yeah
from a row house is just more than a
triplex why I was just curious as I've
seen them used and not quite an agenda
bleah but if you guys think they're to
change loyal seniors mad it I think what
we see is you know also townhomes that
were kind of like could be like row
homes I mean so again yeah we can look
in the terminology but but in general
we're looking at
to allow a more diverse type of family
homes who infill in single-family areas
right so doing a little bit of increased
density in those single-family areas
what if folks think about that my mom
lives in downtown ring and downtown
Wheaton has a lot of older homes I'm
specifically close to the Cedar River
and a lot of those have been converted
from the single-family home of four or
five bedrooms into duplexes either maybe
they were a split-level with an
up-and-down
or some of them they literally divide
the house in half the sense of both
sides haven't opened it down but they've
done really well with that and it
doesn't add a whole lot of extra you
know parking issues and that sort of
thing because they're also very narrow
streets there's a lot of one way is in
downtown right and the traffic is
definitely an issue down there too and
it's been really successful so I would
encourage to at least the duplex model
for that
that's conversion more than building
right
converting an existing ones into smaller
units two of them thank you any other
thoughts of strong reaction for against
for this concept you know I guess with
regards to doing so especially you know
in Old Town I'd be for it and the fact
that I think it would aside from adding
affordability would add more traction
and foot traffic to downtown correct I
mean that's what the vision is for Old
Town so I mean in order for it to
flourish you kind of have to entice
people to live there in order to walk
and have it pedestrian friendly so I
think it's kind of a positive more than
anything yeah I think you'll be helpful
to buttress the comment that talks about
well if you add more housing traffic's
going to get worse in Old Town I think
it's finding it's really important to
counteract that with ADA that says I'm
exactly to point out adding the housing
coop that's with an walkable walking of
Old Town and you know improves as you
put it put the the foot traffic
different topics like about the same
point I mean I know when we use the word
diverse here we are referencing to the
housing models and whatnot but the other
aspect of it is like how do we encourage
more diverse population to move into
Issaquah you know I mean I'll just use
individual homes as an example to you
know come by my point of point across
but we can use that model for use it for
ton homes or apartments or whatnot we
talk about like it a couple of points
I've seen encouraging developers to
develop more right like the example like
if developer is selling a individual
home for like 900 K or more than a
million and whatnot is it a way that we
can you know encourage them to sell a
house that they would potentially sell
for 600 K or something to sell it for
like 350 K what a person was able to
afford afford a 900k home 1 million 1.1
million might not be a stretch bar but
for somebody who can only afford a home
at 350 K 500 K or 6 in the cases which
stretch so if these developers can come
up with plans or if city can you know
increase them to come up with plans
where the sell you know higher you know
houses that you're selling at a premium
for a more prices so you can offset some
prices for it lower you know you can use
that model for you know condos or
townhomes or whatever so so so a
developer would build say 10 houses and
we would require one or two or certain
numbers be affordable they for every
house you sell more than a union would
say you need to sell another house for
350 so that is what inclusionary zoning
is about I'm not looking to my planners
again cuz I'm not a planner but so
that's a requirement to require a
certain number of units that are more
affordable and you can define that so
the challenge of if it does you know if
a developers building a house because it
could sell for nine hundred why would
they sell for six or why would they sell
six or 350 there has to be
for them a reason to do that because
they're wise it wouldn't build it in the
first place so along with those lights
we do have to be required that you do it
which is inclusionary zoning or there's
an incentive and that usually is
reducing costs reducing you know it may
be times that it does reduce costs or
providing a subsidy so I would increase
the city to make it more of a
requirement for the developers to do
that because I mean let's face it right
like I mean if you say if a developer is
going to not gonna develop that property
in it's a call where are they going to
go develop it right okay go beyond
Redmond is already developed and no colm
Meaney is already getting there so
they're not going to say no to money
which they're going to eventually get
right quick so I say make it a
requirement for them to do that okay so
so we'll put a little star number number
five which is again the Klusener zoning
and I think Joan's comment before the
more requirements you put on that it
does kind of create the cost increases
the cost was also increased you know
potentially could increase the cost for
the end-user but I definitely think that
what you're talking about
fits into number five you have something
else just make one yeah I mean this kind
of a model was used in Columbia City
Columbia City is getting gentrified more
I mean that's different but they use
that kind of a model where they have
been newer communities are coming up
there you know for every house that you
sell for you know X higher dollar amount
you need to sell a house which you know
other than must have been required so
much sure about what Seattle has done
around Columbia City or it was a more of
a nonprofit that was doing that so but
you know specifically but that's alright
I mean it didn't you want to talk about
it or so if you're reading the Seattle
newspapers of lately you'll see that
they are doing razones
where they're giving more development
capacity in exchange for some of the
units have to be at a certain price
point you've done that for 25 years in
your master plan communities ESCA
Highlands and there where there were
requirements of the Vale alerts that
provide units at certain price points so
so you have been doing that other cities
have been doing as well usually what's
linked to that is some explicit
increased value to the developer of the
property by City action either by
allowing more units to be built than
otherwise we were allowed or by reducing
parking or waiving fees so there is a
quid pro quo and state legislation sort
of implies there should be some type of
quid pro quo but you and Sammamish and
Newcastle and Bellevue and Redmond and
Kirkland all are doing things like that
and the question is do we try to do it
more but you do have examples of it in
your community and a number of other
communities and Seattle is looking at
doing it and as many neighbourhoods as
they can and so and the city in our
Eastside who does it the most probably
Redmond they do it in almost every
neighborhood and Kirkland does it in
about half their neighborhoods and then
others do it more sporadically and
you've done it in like three you've done
it in two neighborhoods or three and so
that's something that it's more of a
expansion of something you've done when
you can but there's usually a trade-off
process that goes with that that needs
to come with it and there's certainly an
opportunity to do that as part of the
centrist come moratorium right right you
do have right in the urban quarries and
a third neighbor so it is so it is
already covered and then that it's only
covered in the core not in the entire
Central listicle area just the core area
I'm more thinking in the context of the
moratorium review the city could
consider further increase in capacity
yeah exactly so that okay so that yes
that does meant by identified by but
identity so I was that was exactly what
I was going to say as far as I really
think we should look at expanding that
boundary for the inclusionary zoning and
I would also very much encourage rather
than waiving impact fees for us to
increase density because we've already
heard from everybody in the city that we
want to make sure that transportation
and services and schools and all of
those are funded and if we're
eliminating the or waiving the impact
fees those areas are just going to get
worse and I think we would improve
affordability and
smaller housing if we're increasing
density in order to have more housing in
the same area along with the
inclusionary zoning requirement is there
anything in the zoning or the codes
about we have carriers in Issaquah with
houses that have big lots divide those
Lots
the city buys half of the lot bills
affordable housing in Bavaria so we have
to have some resources and I think
that's where number two or number three
rather the housing levy or some other
source but we have to have resources to
do that the city hasn't purchased
housing hasn't been a housing developer
in the past there are nonprofit
developers who do that but that's
definitely a partnership we could
explore more but part of it is how do
how do we afford to do that so that
would have that could be one of the
things that we look at for the proposing
the housing levy is to actually buy land
and then say to a nonprofit housing
developer please come and build tell us
what you can build on this potentially
maybe a new 0.2 ad while we're all
looking at affordable housing we're
forgetting that we need to have
affordable capacity for affordable
service providers so what do you mean by
that I was like oh if we have affordable
housing options for say people with
disability where are those service
providers going to set up shop to
support those seniors or those people
who have disabilities you talk about
commercial more commercial spaces is
that we're talking because their target
audience we're inviting more of the
target audience and but if our retail
which is getting very expensive they
can't afford to be here to support this
demographic that we're inviting into our
town we're going to be basically
abandoning the demographic that we're
trying to serve Derrick looks like he
has a comment okay I was just a I agree
I think the you know something that we
see is the the footprint of some of
those providers this is not that common
in Issaquah so many folks some
you know services in general maybe or
too few to support people that are
transitory between houses good whatever
that might be but uh
our city in particular doesn't have a
lot of work and mortar support locations
and so I agree with the idea of weaving
that in and I think AJ you made us might
have said you know the combination of
nine and two how those would have sort
together I was thinking about a number
nine it talks about you know services to
enable seniors we talked about expanding
that to go beyond seniors I would maybe
suggest expanding the dive into more
info to look at what those services
might be not just housing per se but the
service is a compliment folks to be able
to move into low income house great yeah
you're right so idea number nine
specifically calls it again for seniors
we talked about increasing that so it
doesn't mention see the service as well
so I think that's covered there we've
seen years ago you took a loss exploring
areas to build a complex where all the
services could be provided like it has
in Redmond yes should any of these
developers include such structure in
their dwellings that way they could be
accommodated all the services to the
surrounding meetings and I think again
that's that's going to be addressed in
number nine I believe so so we're kind
of going a little episode although it's
connected we're kind of you know looking
at a little broader than just housing
strategy here but obviously there's some
connections we want to make sure we
don't miss because all those points are
right on where if you have housing our
population that needs some services we
need to make sure they're successful no
sir in those housing spaces so comment
not on that I was kind of chime it's
something different on number two are we
looking into putting it any language
that looks at discouraging and
preventing redevelopment that reduces
the number of dwelling units I'm
thinking specifically where you take it
that's like a duplex or tour triplex and
you tear it down and you build a large
home I know there's been some language I
think it was in Portland
where they looked at preventing that
kind of development that you can't have
new construction that reduces the total
that reduces the aggregate density I
think that was that were perhaps
qualifying a number two okay I made a
note of that and and then I think I'm in
the same thing but in the other
direction would we want to consider
looking into capping the size of
development I think this kind of goes
off when cyntha was trying to try and
get it earlier where if you have a
developer that's going to be building
say a large 4 bedroom home on a lot you
would still allow the same total amount
of developable space but you would
prohibit building a single-family home
and say okay with you're going to build
a structure that large it has to be say
a duplex or has to incorporate an ad you
I think I'm not sure this has been
implemented but I've definitely seen
this in like a think piece that says the
fact that basically prevents you from
building giant houses saying that we the
city will require developer to build the
same volume of living space but they
would require to be broken up into
smaller living units whether that sum
that we would want to require
particularly within the central plan so
the zoning would preclude single-family
housing exactly.you you were yeah but
yeah but then yes yeah basically I think
I don't know if there's any zone to
preclude explicitly single-family
housing
okay urban core because there's a
minimum that they are so there's we do
so basically our highest density air you
have to meet a certain floor area ratio
so meaning how much of building per the
actual lot size and so that would
preclude you from building a
single-story or a house a single-family
how okay what we want to consider with
all this talk about building the
affordable housing and boosting the
diversity of the housing stock of saying
outside of the epicenters took up trying
to discourage single-family home
construction and still building family
housing but but the requirement would be
broken up into smaller units you think
there's only room for 45
no family homes left-leaning else's
identity
I think they most of our zoning left is
tends to more high-density so but we can
we can look at also if there are in the
current zoning if there's anything that
kind of concludes that's the other
pieces remember we want to have
diversity of housing stock right so we
know a single-family house is not bad
obviously we're only getting all
single-family housing we want to shift
it this way but we also don't want to do
something that discourages that's what
was usually so like there's a lot of
subdivisions are still under
construction in its core would you say
that but that at pipeline is pretty much
exhausted in terms of greenfield space
and I'm thinking I think the developer
that that's filing to put what seventy
homes right out of Newports way so
instigating that the city in theory
could have said well no you have to
build 140 duplexes rather than 70
single-family homes I mean it's a guess
there's Pryor on a thousand more
single-family houses could get built in
in the city if you include the Highlands
and Mallard Bay and Bergsma and
Silverado and I mean so there's there's
but it's it's a it's a finite quantity
that amount of that amount of product
left in our future has an end that's
coming and there could be other things
that happen in the meantime where the
city might change the zoning on some of
those parcels to up zone them that's not
in the cards right now but ten years
from now who knows right so but
multifamily the thing is there's a
there's a huge scale differential
between the multifamily in the
single-family so all of the
single-family that's left may may get
you to a thousand but you look at Atlas
and Gateway and you're at a thousand you
know what I mean so so it's just there's
there's a disproportionate amount of
what's coming down both pipes when pipes
little um pipes pretty big in terms of
our housing stock so you'd say trying to
manipulate the thousand sing the family
homes to get 1,400 homes instead isn't
really worth fighting rather than trying
to get a couple of six-story apartment
buildings built in central Sukhois
because you get more bang for your buck
that way I guess my concern is I don't
know enough
about our future - no I mean so you're
coming at it from the perspective of we
have enough single-family housing you
know we really want to increase our
density overall and and you know 20
years from now if all we're building is
multifamily we may all be sitting here
or the next group of us will be sitting
here saying how do we get more
single-family housing right so I just
don't know the answer to that it's a
complicated question AJ and I'm going to
just say I don't Mike I don't have a
crystal ball for that one yeah so on
that multifamily idea I think one of the
things that the data really heavily
showed was that if we were getting any
of the affordability it was all in the
80% range and so on number four and
number five I would really encourage if
there's a way to shift that more to the
50% ami it seems like when we have given
the option for 60 to 80%
everything's ended up at 80% and that's
not giving us as much movement in the
direction linnaeus okay Oh God
yeah so I've been thinking out the house
and levy and the impact fees and you
know I really don't like the idea of
passing more east existing a new
residence right any person of the city's
income already comes from probably taxes
I think there's better ways to funders
like 3% of the income comes only from
investment income rate and what I ran
was on the financials so the investment
income for Donnie can we you can
increase that multiple fold yes yeah
okay so we we want to make sure we do
have one more thing about gender tonight
and know it says till 8:30 but I think
we really were till here till 8 that's
already two hours and it kind of gets a
little tiring after a while but we are
there any other strategies so I we have
a lot of notes - it seems like the then
nine here are good we're going to tweak
some we're going to adjust some then do
some more research on some of them
are there any other strategies that are
on these searches matrix so see exhibit
see that you feel are important to
include in the strategy final document
moving forward and again thinking about
that with what problem statement does it
address this is currently a strategy is
not addressing or doesn't address in the
way you believe should so are these all
currently included or these all not no
these are the ones that are Ike options
so that that of other other cities are
doing other things that we could do with
them and so these are these are options
that are not currently and yes yes
that's why we reprinted the our recent
this because in the packet it had these
included and so to make it simpler to
look at we remove the ones that are
ready in the what we're calling the
final working draft so I I think next
slide is let's take a look at number
yeah
number nine we're focusing a lot on the
seniors but I would like to propose that
we change that from seniors seniors and
people with disabilities yes we are
planning to do that and looking at if
it's a living and homelessness and
expanding that a bit hmm thank you
so one other on the strategy matrix c-17
the interjurisdictional program such as
arch that isn't listed I know it's
something that we participate in is
there is there a way that we could
expand that or use that as a racial
focus so looking at more in regional
efforts as a strategy what is folks
think about that
important to work together regionally
because the problem of housing is a
regional problem we house people who
work elsewhere in the community in the
region and who live elsewhere in the
region work in Issaquah there's
definitely overlap we're not working
together our solutions may not work out
the way we plan good point I won't say
exactly what Arthur is safe is the mic
but that's I think that's one of the
concepts of arch is that the efforts
together benefit us all versus I want
five units here and you get five units
there and so realizing that folks don't
have that don't think about city
boundaries all that often from that so
and the other any other so when you're
looking at this problem statement sheet
so you've got three problem statements
is there anything you're feeling is
really lacking and then maybe that helps
you drive to exhibit see if there's
anything additional I don't know bring
up one more point so yeah even looking
at everything through the lens of income
have we talked about making special
considerations for it's a public
servants people that work in nonprofits
I mean it's a different lens they're not
necessarily correlated and I think that
gets a little bit to the house at making
sure you're looking at fair housing and
so Arthur mentioned before about how we
can market specifically to you know
those segments of the population if we
had some affordable options but I think
people always think about the teachers
and the firefighters and police officers
and public sector employees and
nonprofit employers are definitely kind
of in that mix as well and so I think
that's kind of captured there it would
have some of that the marketing would be
the way to do that yeah unless a
specific organization again like builds
housing for their employees it's kind of
hard to just say you can only put you
know teachers in this building
yeah I was just going to add that uh
going through this you know some of the
the prevention efforts to know Tennant
prevent protections from a thank you
letter numbers and the source of income
in anti-discrimination ordinances I was
looking for example of c22 that's a
state legislation piece but one of the
examples are efforts to protect tenants
from as the example was given earlier
from you know income or source of income
discrimination you know just cause
evictions so the addiction prevention
efforts my guess is that is on one tier
down from this discussion but I just
wanted to call that out as something
that I think is important
thank you also on C 22 the MFT statute
right now we're given away 12 years
worth of impact fees or taxes are
protected yeah if there's a way that we
can reduce that since we're only
requiring 20% of 20 or 25% to be
affordable housing or low-income housing
looking at reducing that and then I
believe that the cities the
jurisdictions themselves define that
percentage of it within the development
right there the cities have the
flexibility on defining the
affordability levels they're looking for
so emailing it quote 20% but you can
make it at 50% of median and again it's
the same comment I made earlier it's a
quid pro quo thing is how much is the
value of the property taxes versus what
you get in exchange so the percentage is
that but you can also do eight years
there's an 8 and a 12 year I not require
jurisdiction to provide for bonds that
we could so the state law says if you
give a property tax exemption you must
get public you're supposed to get public
benefit at 8 year they leave that
totally up to the local jurisdictions to
find local benefit public benefit at 12
years the government says the state
legislations that you must have as one
of the public benefits it's not all
affordable housing now in asean county
Kirkland has an eight-year benefit and
they require affordable housing so you
can also
included at the public benefit you're
looking for so you can also ask for
other types of things would Emmett with
the tax incentive program since we're
looking I'm looking at d7 okay it's
worth changing on this uh the eleven by
sevens team now print out number nine
and where it talks about singers so
include disabled shouldn't we also
change it in v7o so in kelowna this is
not going to move further than today so
if it comes off of this list and onto
here then we would talk about so these
are ideas so if it doesn't fit what we
want to put on our working document
that's going to move forward we don't
need to change the wording but the
concept you're talking about in d7 we
can look at for when we we readjusted to
the broader audience so okay thank you
so if we're looking at c-17
interjurisdictional programs I think we
should also be looking at C 21 Regional
Housing Finance strategy okay she's 17
thank you because I gets the more
regional options to look at that okay
um so Arthur in this meeting and in the
previous meeting mentions this developer
that was converting the hotels into SRO
and very successful with that so I
wonder about including wording from c7
into our SRO to potentially increase the
so the c7 is allow flexible use of
larger sites so I imagine and that would
be something like a hotel that wasn't
opened early an SRO but had potential to
be an SRO thank you
so it feels like we have for our 10 or 9
now 10 with the regional efforts it
feels like we have captured the broader
kind of approach and then these are the
ones we're wrenching now we're kind of
refining it a bit more is that is that
safe to say so the 9 that we have here
and then the regional efforts would be
our strategy that staff are going to go
back do some more research gather more
data think about long-term short-term
because obviously we can't do everything
all at once and how that how that would
play out to have a discussion with
council is that fair now if you are you
know at home brush your teeth tonight
whatever you can email your Commission
liaisons or some brilliant solid idea
you read something the paper tomorrow
this is a still working document but it
seems like we're we're kind of to the
place where we we have a good set of
strategies and kind of moving on is that
all right people all right so our next
step is actually as so this is in the
packet it is the final report if you
forgot to use doing a baby mouth
we had a trade to hell in Souls yeah
yeah that is exactly run all right so
Exhibit A in our package is a draft
document for what's going to be what's
meant to capture the work thus far and
the work of these Commission's to bring
forward to council that is correct and
so I think what we're looking for this
evening is not you know word smithing or
getting to you know what the final
version this document looks like put
some input to help staff kind of build
out what's currently kind of an outline
for that document that sent to capture
the work that you've done aren't any
excess yeah
yes a page
26:53 in the packet outlines the
component of the document the report to
go to council so providing some
background why we're doing this work the
process we undertook and refer back to
the housing element of our comprehensive
plan and the mission statement that was
developed for our work and then each of
the three steps that we've worked
through since we started back in
December or earlier which included a
route view of comprehensive data meaning
with focus groups to get more input from
different segments of the community or
joint meetings a Housing Survey those
are all inputs right this process that
we then use to develop our three problem
statements and then this process of you
know pulling out discussing strategies
for potential inclusion and our ultimate
housing strategy so are there pieces
that are missing from that outline
modifications yes clarification in fact
up the problem statement would also
lists lists of our strategies that we
come up with or under each problem
statement or so that would be indy okay
right and so step through the policy
conversation yeah one comment I would
make there is like if we can be more
detail about like I mean like an
explicit section where items that are
actionable by the city itself to me
those are low-hanging fruits if you know
we asked it because it's within the
control of the city so if we are trying
to come up with the strategy for our
city so you know clearly delineate them
because it's in our hand right right
right so what city versus or one of the
regional strategies right order
or other other parties okay when Tom and
I have is under step 3
I guess well rather it's D 3 so
considerations and moving forward that's
sort of the implementation phase of it
and I'm wondering if it would be worse
kind of pulling that out into its own
step is like an implementation step and
then sort of a question is it also is
this an appropriate place to also kind
of briefly describe you know metrics or
benchmarking for the future to see if
the strategies are working or that would
that be somewhere else or I'm talking
about high-level check-ins in for
clarification for myself and yeah this
is considerations moving forward even
just to get to September distribute to
counter since these are the kind of
initial set but I think that's a really
great point about the kind of
measurement and accountability for this
process and then ultimately for the
strategy one point I would make is the
population of Mexico is 34,000 and the
number of responses I'm seeing has less
than half a percent a lot of the
deductions he might be making from the
survey are probably not statistically
significant so maybe a limitations kind
of together you never want to get more
data plans for the the concretions with
meaningful we want to get more data
points I had a similar comment just
about so there was some data also about
household income and how long people
have lived or if they live and work in
this class so I thought it would also be
good to say not only what percent is
represented but how how well that scales
with the what a comparison of
demographics of folks who answered
versus our community yes yeah so
explicitly point out differences in
terms of who responded versus who's
actually in the community can
another the other typical point is you
want also representative sample so you
know what I mean
yes examples we're not a statistic like
yes this is not an example of the
population wasn't it I apologize for not
being here I had the wrong meeting on my
calendar and went to the wrong place on
D 9 did we discuss that at all support
development of emergency transitional
and permanent supportive housing itself
really did it homelessness yes yeah so
we actually are going to add that to
number 9 of the strategies and we're
going to broaden that again and
homelessness is one this thing was
specifically mentioned so thank you well
what are you going to refer to that yeah
let me go look at the details of other
comments recommendations yeah so I'm
looking at the idea of this C step 2
problem statements and then the related
data there was a lot of data that was
presented that I mean doesn't
necessarily fit into those three
categories of the problem statements but
the paints a larger picture of you know
some of the things that we're facing say
in condo statutes and you know not being
able to build those that I wouldn't
necessarily fit into any of the three of
those there may need to be another area
that just talks about a broader picture
of the data so maybe building out like
the what we covered in so it's here like
beef or melon yeah a one yeah but make
sure that that's comprehensive got a so
wha D step three I see rationale for
strategies it's a summary to data
linkages right you know when I was going
through the notes for
prior meetings we're in a lot of data is
based on the survey conducted like from
2000 to 2010 that's right like you know
the population you know what kind of
what percentage of the population is
there and whatnot are we going to link
to those data so qualitative and and
American Community Survey and census
data I mean my point is like if it is
only bad it would concern me because
things have progressed way differently
over the last three or four years
compared to how it was even earlier in
this decade right time in
anything else if we do all that we'll
have a a solid document to bring forward
okay and again and condense point if
you've got you know a great idea that
comes to you be sure to you know reach
out to one of your staff liaisons
okay comments are due June first
recording yeah yeah so we've just been
talking about you know based on the
outline what your recommendations would
be but there some of that document is
then built out in Exhibit A so take a
closer look let us know you've got a
week just to take a look and I think
that's our last I have a little question
I haven't had time to look at all the
detail quizzes but I made a comment in
previous meetings where non English
speakers included in this survey at all
this survey was not translated provided
in other languages and I think we might
be missing an important part of the
population I agree it's right so a
limitation of that survey joke thank you
noted you know one thing I would love to
learn more about is what some of the
other cities have done recently or what
they're planning to do what's what's the
best way to find that out write this in
the background data yeah
and that would have been in your first
packet from last week the report card
from I think was two years ago where we
had what all the other cities have been
trying and there are a couple other
cities who are going through similar
processes working on housing strategies
so that might be a point of a future
connection so for the Commission so that
chart that matrix of what the other
cities was doing was very valuable so
that's not included in this I would
definitely recommend that organizers
know conceal so I think we'll conclude
this portion of it however we'd still
like to open it up for public comments
so if anyone would like to come up and
speak please do so and just give us your
name and your address
hi my shirt it's a good time the city
staff knows me before I even come up
introduce myself
Steve Pereira 170 northeast I would
street a couple thoughts I heard one was
I would like to comment from those
sitting try to connect the seniors to
see if there's a way we're coming senior
housing I know my own experience with my
mom once you give us our nature get set
in a certain ways it's hard to look at
that so I think that's a great
opportunity for outreach in connection
whether it's affordable housing or just
connecting with a segment of the
population another thought was I know
when we looked at density per housing
try to incentivize builders increasing
the height limit have a certain number
of rooms maybe that could be looked at
putting money into a fund or to a kitty
to use for affordable housing not just a
unit but having built it more energy
efficient or someplace else rather than
on-site another thought was to look at
I'm going to use the word downzoning
in the sense of you have the right to
use your land for the best possible use
and I think of Pickering the state's
word initial is going to be smaller size
lots and the Builder decided to build
larger size homes more property take
away that ability or limit that ability
to have larger size Lots larger size
houses to afford more chance for
affordable on the scale of less
expensive done necessary for affordable
housing is a relative term these days
where even small Lots get a high price
my last thought was one of the comments
that came up was I think and see it
Seattle anyway you have to as if you're
a landlord you have to take the first
person that comes up I don't know if I
have a duplex I don't know if I like
that idea as much from the standpoint I
and I'm not trying to say look at me I'm
done something great I tried to kept low
so that people can afford to live there
and I choose maybe some people that
wouldn't be able to afford to live there
otherwise and so I don't like taking
away that incentive from people who are
trying to do the right thing by saying
you have to take the first person that
comes in if we try to talk
incentivizing things for teachers and
firefighters and policemen have some
lease discrepancy where the owners can
try to do the right thing so I would
just like that just wanted to share that
perspective with each of you thank you
for struggling with this with this with
this issue and giving me a chance to
learn about what you all are doing thank
you
hello my name is Arya Mohajir oh um I
don't live in a Sequoia I live in
Spanish but I am pretty secluded
advisory board and I had to come here to
just observe what the three Commission's
are doing and I find interesting about
another thoughts about how I know that
it's a pretty the decisions are based on
like data-driven things and I'm just
going to stress the point that um if the
survey has such a small percentage that
will return like such a small sample
size isn't like that good for making a
decision and could lead to some
misconceptions of community and just
want to stress that it's important that
when you're trusting in data that the
data is good and then there's beep
besides that what I really anything else
add thank you for letting me listen in
thank you okay
before we leave we have two sets of
minutes to approve so we have hmm
they're not a poop because they're not a
first yeah we're no we don't bear minds
because there's three groups and so we
chose not to have an official so do we
do anything oh the reason they're in
there's people that were new to see what
everyone had talked about and that was
in the direction so change of course
there are two sets of minutes here we
have January 26 in May 11 right last
time they had asked for that because
they don't know what had happened before
so I've cut again for missing a meeting
sorry
so but they're just in there for
newcomers and to see what's going on and
it might help you when you're brushing
your teeth and come up you know come up
with something else and you email a
spreadsheet first so there we go
excellent otherwise I think we are
excuse me thing on I don't thank you so
much for your participation in all of
these meetings and keep in touch thank
you very much for putting this whole
thing together we realize the hard work
and the hours that go into preparing for
this and then we grill you to death so
thank you and welcome
Thanks my office is trying to say you
don't I got his neighbors getting
commissioner