good evening and welcome to the February
15th meeting in the planning competition
tonight we're going to talk continue our
discussion on revisions or it's a clop
we're gonna look at two of the
neighborhoods and see where we should go
with that but first we have two minutes
to approve the minutes of January 1st
5th and February the first do I have a
motion to approve the minutes for
January 25th I'd like to make a motion
to approve the minutes for January 25th
second any discussion any changes all
those in favor say aye
all right the minutes of February first
I need a motion like to make a motion to
approve the minutes of 2018 it's a great
first very first what do they say second
second any discussion hearing none all
those in favor say aye
okay so you can pull up the different
neighborhoods
I just like to kind of remind suckers
everybody um me included the City
Council gave us the directions to do a
vision it did not give us the authority
or the directions to do any code so when
we go through this tonight I want you to
just look at the various issues with the
idea that they are visions and we're not
going to add any codes or any assumption
that there's gonna be codes in the
vision so we're going to go and do
something a little different I know that
they planted the taskforce put a lot of
time into creating a packet couple years
ago and it was never approved by the
City Council but there is
a lot of valuable information in there
they spent a long time doing it even a
lot longer than we have even though it
seems like we've been doing this forever
and so Lindsey came up with the in her
reading and homework with the link that
Trish gave to all of you about going
back to the original report by the by
the task force I don't know if you've
had a chance to look at it but what I'd
like to do tonight if I have your
approval is I like to go through what
the city has going to be in front of us
what you have in your packet and then
after we go through the first community
that we're going to go and look at what
the original task force had a lot of the
issues on there are things that don't
really compute to what we're looking at
now but there might be some ideas in
there that actually well we missed that
one we need to put that into our final
vision of what we wanted to do so if
that's okay with you yes okay so with
that Kate would you pull up those
communities that we're gonna look at
tonight
so we're gonna with what used to be
called gateway is now being called
Wesley port so so structurally just to
kind of go through the framework and
then we'll go back up to the top is we
have a paragraph kind of describing
what's going on with the area today
there's a paragraph about what the
future we expect the area to evolve into
there's a map and then we have our
developer obligations city implementing
actions and then measures for success
[Music]
segregated by the four objectives that
we identified in this story section
which is livable distinctive connected
and sustainable so with that I'm gonna
scroll back up to the top and
look at you all awkward okay yeah so I
have some thoughts on the whole livable
distinctive connective sustainable thing
because I went back and I looked at
neighborhood visions for Bellevue and
Redmond and Kirkland and Renton and all
around the area and none of them include
developer obligations and things like
that as far as trying to create code
language some of them have policy
languages things for the city to think
about but none of them have the
developer obligations and they're all
all of their content is organized around
certain topics that people care about
things like character scale of the
neighborhood the connectivity and
mobility housing in residential parks
and natural environment and I feel like
those are essential to getting a vision
for what that neighborhood is or will be
whereas the information that's included
in that liveable distinctive just
doesn't doesn't provide a picture for me
and then secondarily thinking about the
user of the document whether or not the
public and staff and developers would
read that as it is
so those are kind of my two concepts
here why I don't think that necessarily
works for what we're going for as a
vision so instead of developer
obligations as I read some of these
issues here I look at that more as what
the vision is what it's going to look
like instead of what the developer is
going to support
parks and trails will be will create
social opportunities to me that's more
of a vision than having a statement in
there for developer obligations and I
think if you're trying to create a
distinctive view of what is West Newport
saying providing parks and trails that
creative social opportunities that's
something that we want in every
neighborhood sure and so trying to bring
this down to what really is that
neighborhood what do we need to know
about it to create a vision that
developers and the public and staff can
buy into so that we're all working off
the same page and I just don't think
that those things do that for me so
we've spent multiple nights getting to
this place right agreed and you guys
told us to get to this place
I can bring up video footage and so so
what you're hearing from staff is we've
had like six meetings to get to here
because you guys have funneled it to
this place so the problem with that
Keith is we didn't have the task force
report and you didn't provide us any
other examples that we should be working
from in order to know what some of the
other options were so what we did was
look at what you had presented and say
okay yes we want something to be livable
and distinctive and you know things like
that whereas when I went back and looked
at other options I realized what's
missing and what things are important
okay okay so when you look at the on the
first page the future can we add
additional things on there and still
have our livable distinctive
if we feel like that's useful I think
that's fine what I would want to see in
the future section is things that cover
things like the mobility and the parts
of a natural environment and things that
talk about what this neighborhood is in
the specifics what are the things that
make this West Newport well I was just
gonna say that ya know I have a couple
thoughts first I think thinking about
how we sort of got funnel to this place
I actually like this because it's
different than every other plan general
plan or comprehensive plan or whatever
they've ever seen which I've always felt
was sort of our oh they're always sort
of disjunct parks over here and
something else over here and something
else over here and this I think gives us
the opportunity to kind of tie it all
together but so I like the organization
of it but but it's maybe what you're
saying Lindsey and I think you're onto
something there is that we're missing an
opportunity to get more specific and
talk about in this case West Newport in
the next case you know something else
because we have more general language
which we talked about several meetings
past that flies up above this that
generally talks about what we want to
see so maybe it's just a matter of
getting more specific I do I mean I'm
not wedded to the idea of I love the
measures of success like that tells us
when we know we got there I'm not wedded
to whether we have developer obligations
or city implementing actions I would I
would look to developers in the city you
know staff to tell me if that's
important because I think you know where
we're going and whether and when we get
there is more important to me and I
think that the first piece is where
we're going and then the measures of
success is how we know when we got there
so that's
that's those are my thoughts though
nobody said anything I'm gonna call on
you Ron I have more things to say
Oh
you need a microphone
if no one illnesses well I'd like to
hear from the commissioners first I read
and by all means I've read through this
three times and
do you not like the way it's set up or
do you like the garbage in it to be more
specific what would you ask
[Music]
I would add more storytelling time
and someone reads this I want them to be
able to visualize what we're looking for
as opposed to this sounds very realistic
and not very aspirational okay so would
you add more to the future and add maybe
two or three paragraphs that gives you
the aspirational stuff and then what
Lindsay wants or suggests that she wants
what she suggests I would say yes it
needs more me here okay
it needs more meat there and we can work
on that what about the this part would
you keep it the way it is I would change
theirs sponsor than that the way it is
structured now it's difficult to read
it's difficult to understand so the way
I think it's laid out if there's just
too much too many words it's too worried
we're a person who's going to look at
this they should be able to look at this
and once they read it understand what
they just read within 30 seconds 45
seconds and this takes almost two
minutes to be able to read and to end
and then when you are done with it you
go what did I just read that's the way I
look at this so I think there's too many
words and I understand we also want meat
to the to the vision so that it's more
when we write the code it's better
understood but I think that's the
competency of the code writer as opposed
to this document
where you find a seat
okay so one of the things I tried to do
when looking at each of the
neighborhoods was to do a SWOT analysis
as former mayor Butler used always say
strengths weaknesses opportunities and
threats and I think that allows you to
take a look at the individual
neighborhood and kind of have a
brainstorming session on okay what's
really important to West Newport what
are the things where we have an
opportunity there and what are the
weaknesses that we need to make up for
in that and so I was able to identify a
few things that I think those are the
unique things that really talked about
what that neighborhood is so I think
that would be a useful technique as well
so we back to just that perfect you know
we're adding the paragraphs we can add
that we can come up with two or three
additional ideas that you want to put
into that and I'm sure staff can create
and we can add bullets underneath this
what I want to know is after we do that
what are you doing with it
do we want it set up the way it is I
mean we originally said that we like the
the format I don't like some stuff I
think one of the great reasons that it's
hard to read it's because the way it's
written you know it it goes back and
forth between different ways to start
the 2.32 starts a different way than two
point one and it's not easy and
consistent to read if you tell me what
the
you know I mean my perspective is I like
the structure I the one thing that I
could see maybe used to make it more
simple would be you could actually
combine the developer obligations and
city implementing actions to one quatre
category that's just implementing
actions whether that be developer or the
city or whomever I do like again like I
said the measures of success I mean I
like the structure we can work on
consistency in wording or you know being
more specific but as I go through here
and start looking you know circling
things like there's a lot of specificity
in here there are some places where it's
general but maybe by combining developer
obligations and city implementing
actions we could you know cut it down on
the word the number of words a little
bit and combine some things I like the
structure so the reason the developer
obligations stuff was put in was so that
we could satisfy the idea of the
original plan didn't end up giving us
what we wanted and many thought that was
because it didn't have the code language
that solidified that vision and so if
I'm not mistaken the developer
obligations was put in kind of a pseudo
code so that we can say developers you
have to do this in these neighborhood so
that we get this vision yes yes okay so
my question is do we think that
accomplishes that does it meet the need
of that audience that reader of the
document
and I guess that's more for the
commissioners
because there's a lot of ways that we
can handle code and I think many of us
believe that the original CIP didn't
give us what we wanted because the code
wasn't there to back that up but whether
or not this developer obligations idea
satisfies that or whether there's
another way for us as PPC to make a
recommendation to Council to say we
approve of these neighborhood visions
but you have to put a plan in place to
create the code that codify is these
ideas I don't know what the best option
is but I feel like we need to come up
with something solve a question so are
these and written are these actually
enforceable yes so would any development
need to meet all 12 of these so you
would apply them as applicable so like
for example because it got worse so like
if so let's say that there's some
objectives oriented to open space right
if I've got a piece of property that has
open space on it or adjacent to it and
that would not apply right so if it so
it would be as applicable
so like ensure variety of housing
choices are available does that mean the
code says you can no longer have a
development where it's all the same
housing type so it would give the city
the opportunity to have a conversation
with an applicant to say you know what
the only thing the only housing that we
have in this neighborhood is apartments
and they're all two and three-bedroom
Apartments and that's what you're
proposing we've got something here that
says we're trying to get a variety of
housing so you know what's the
opportunity to get you to do something
different defend your project to be
offer a different type and if the
developer doesn't play ball can you
actually deny them a permit so on that
one is I would say the answer is
probably no because unless it's the last
project in the neighborhood you know
there's always opportunities for
something else to build differently but
this is an opportunity for us to have a
conversation because it's clear we want
a variety of housing right and so
there's good in there's gonna need to be
some discretion in the enforcement of
these but I think that's I think that's
what I'm struggling with is if you can't
deny a permit on these are they actually
enforceable so they're so they are
[Music]
they give the city leverage to to have a
conversation and that's better than what
we have now right we have now is we want
mixed use neighborhood okay I you know
so there's there's a level of
specificity here that allows for a
different conversation to happen I mean
yeah I mean some of them and some of
them are more directive than others
right I mean if there's if there's you
know there's some in here that talk
about orientation to open soon aces or
even you're gonna provide opportunities
for people to get you know into an
appreciate open space as well okay
that's pretty clear you have to do that
right and if the developer says no I
just want to put a chain-link fence up
against wetland you know to keep people
out of it then for real situation we had
an applicant who wants to put a parking
lot next to a creek okay that's a great
relationship to that open space which is
supposed to be amenity to your property
right with this I can tell him now you
can't do that
maybe there needs to be a trail there
may be the parking lot needs to be set
back and there needs to be actually a
public space next to the creek right so
there's so it's not it's not prescribing
like you can only build a four-story
building here right that's code these
are in the conversation
trying to not use this because it's
gonna open up a whole other endures box
these are like design guidelines so
these are there's they're more they're
not prescriptive their performance-based
so that's like okay you know we expect
you to do this you might be able to
accomplish that 12 different ways but it
doesn't mean you get to ignore it right
so so AJ you were late I was and now
that everybody knows if you're right
we weren't directed to write code we
were directed to creative vision
and we can't think of all of those
builder requirements in school
our idea is the vision of the general
you know aspirational thing if the City
Council reads this and they decide that
they want specific codes then they'll go
back and they'll tell the city write
codes to make this happen and then it
will come back to us to review the code
right so and I get that like I don't I
don't want this to be code that's not
what this is supposed to be and this
this is this is great and it is much
better than where we had before but I
feel like it's not it's still
aspirational and so when we deliver this
to council can we recommend that it
still needs code sure you can recommend
anything you want okay
that would be my approach - yeah well
yeah because I totally you what you're
saying in that like this this isn't code
and it's not supposed to be code you
know we don't want it to be code but I
just feel like it's it doesn't do
anything until there is also okay your
turn
so
in my own okay y'all
good we're all on the paragraphs are
pretty specific to the neighborhood they
are not describing anything but the
things in that neighborhood I suppose
you could get more detailed and
aspirational in that I think I've done
that before though I think you would
need to suggest what you think is
missing from each of those neighborhoods
in particular now the way I envision the
next pages being used
our staff and the developer look at
these concepts together and from the
very beginning you're all aligned going
in a better direction than you are now
and everybody is on the same page with
their neighborhood and what it's
supposed to be and that never happened
before and I see this then following
through to Development Commission as a
part of a neighborhood checklist where
the development Commission then says
well you know but all of your your
obligations are not being fulfilled and
so then the Development Commission has
more tools code for each neighborhood to
this detail is like crazy hard
gives no flexibility and variability so
well it does seem like it I of all
people would love to say and you shall
do exactly this I also know that that's
how you get a stagnant town and we well
we don't need the freedom that they've
had to this point where staff just sort
of interprets and it's not very guided I
think this actually gets us to a far
better place without the extraordinary
cost than the extraordinary impacts to
the people who do want to develop the
right way in our town so is it
perfection I'm sure that there's 10
gazillion things wrong with it so what I
were interested in hearing I guess from
everyone well there always is you know
that's true I do what I were interested
in hearing is neighborhood by
neighborhood cuz and there you've all
walked it okay what are the
opportunities that all of you saw that
should be in the future for that
descriptive language the language that
you're talking about is housing
this all used to be set up and it didn't
work and so something else is happening
those exact words and and so I'm happy
to have it changed to this and I'm
rarely happy so now language tweaking
ideas all fine but I don't think you
want to change the structure
do any of you what but if I jump in the
because I was I totally agree with
Connie in terms of process and the way
it's set up I like it because and I I
think from a Development Commission
standpoint and I think Carl would go
along with this that we can we can use
these developer obligations in a review
of a project it's it's specific enough
for us to say we don't think you're
meeting this as opposed to building high
during the box and so forth
I think that's workable and I like how
it's kept separately from the city is
then the city can be doing their things
and we can all see if they're meeting
their requirements and then I like the
third part because the public can look
at that and say yeah are we are we
getting this vision in the end I see
everybody shaking their heads that we're
gonna continue with this yes so do you
want to go through the list of the 1 2 3
4 5 whatever things that are under
livable do you want to take them
individually do you want to change them
so I wanted to make a comment before we
get to that stage
I'm actually really frustrated with the
way this document reads not the way that
it's set up a way that it reads and why
we are saying what like for instance in
today
Newport Way is missing sidewalks and
bicycle facilities why are we even
putting that language in this document
we should be saying this from a
aspirational standpoint a vision we
should have a vision for each
neighborhood isn't that the next
paragraph so you're the today is just
too grounded and then you have a vision
yeah you can sort of go that direction
but I say we get rid of today altogether
because it's just extra words
I think it's anything it's helpful when
you're looking back at these documents
years later who might not be super
useful for the audience today but you
consider that you know these documents
really updated five years or so could we
do that on another points instead
so we the first sentence up there since
adoption of these sir I mean I can read
that
breathing emphasize a gateway and
arrival into Issaquah where its unique
history in connection with nature is
visible create a create a harmony with
nature and a blending with the green
environment let forms and the built
environment reinforce the arrival into
Issaquah be natural and modest in scale
you love that don't you I hate that so
so first off I'm just gonna go ahead and
attack this is not the arrival into
Issaquah this is this is mid street I
mean is applause farther west than
that's right and so you know it's like
okay I mean if you if you want this
transcribed you don't want that but I
want I'm trying to get to what Ron wants
in the way of a taking away J okay so
now we're going to read Nelligan a reef
future all right we made
well here's my point if you have never
been to a car before yes and you read
this you're a developer you're gonna
build a building or a West in West
Newport neighborhood yes in any of one
of these neighborhoods and you read this
does this sell you hard but it's
instinct yeah it's supposed to sell you
today I'm talking about the neighborhood
there's it's the language that's in here
is dry it's boring and it's it's it
doesn't there's no sales aspect to it it
doesn't draw me in and say that's
neighborhood honor I'm gonna build my
building in I want to be part of that
neighborhood don't think it's for the
developer I think it's for the community
but even the community did I don't read
this in Qom best place I want to be okay
so I can agree with that idea that we
can change up the future language to do
things like this is going to be a
tight-knit community with communal
spaces that they really enjoy and like
give a vision of what somebody would buy
into we can do that by emailing Keith
those ideas this is supposed to be a
well this is our this is our district
visions this is a sales document
and we're not treating it as a sales
document I think it's a planning
document but even a planning document
can be a sales document or it can be
really dry and uh nests per a tional and
that's why we're not getting one what we
really want is because we can't even
sell the idea to anyone because we can't
even figure out what the idea is we just
these are this is a collection of words
and it just it doesn't work and we're
trying to make something that we're
trying to make it work and I just I'm
frustrated with this so I can tell you I
I've written this sales paragraph for
each of these neighborhoods and those
paragraphs did not make it did not make
the cut and I can hazard a guess as to
why because I probably spent 20 hours
writing sales paragraphs and fighting to
get them in the document but no and I
expect is the that they want the future
paragraph to in some way linked to the
next pages in a way that you can sort of
check them off right so that these are
the component parts would make my
neighborhood in theory that I yeah you
wanted to be specific articulate and
actionable Weston leads you to the
tactical stuff in the next page you
don't want it to be fluffy and in it
that was the fluff to sell their
development AK you've gotten these
pulling parts put in so so
I have people to take their heads and
this was a good process so we're going
to leave we could talk about this all
night
we can do that we can
and add some things to make your
aspirational idea
shortly what Linton's they wants we can
do that but right now can we look at
this and see if what we have is here if
it works and then go back and see if
just like we were talking about that the
first page was a brand new to this at
this house the first page has to fit
into this we could talk about the first
page forever can we get into business so
and just to say that a different way
Jones I think you're saying and I want
to say it just just a little bit
different is if if you do these things
you know if the developer does those
things if the city does their things and
you know we'll get success but we're
also gonna then achieve the future
vision for this neighborhood I mean it
needs to work in both directions
so I don't mind so if we're going to
have things to how we describe this like
close-knit you know then the question is
okay so what in here is gonna make that
close-knit you know okay so so usually
it's making spaces with a community park
okay so so if that's if that's what
close-knit needs then then there should
be something in here between the city's
actions and the developers obligations
that gets us that right so that
I mean that's how this should work and
so if we're gonna we're gonna add stuff
to the future which I'm not problem with
and I'm fine with more aspirational
stuff she's right she populated actually
a lot of the aspirational stuff has been
in earlier versions you guys have hated
it
stripped it out and so I'm finding this
a very interesting conversation kind of
Groundhog Day
so but that's fine we're gonna find that
balance point that hopefully we can all
nod our heads at the end of the day
which will be February 28th Wednesday I
think to answer your question Jonah I
think yes I think if we actually deliver
everything on this page this
neighborhoods gonna be awesome
so I think I think what I think what
we've laid out about the developer in
the city and it is better this is a
measure of success I would say yes if
we're able that's cute if we the
community the city and future developers
able execute on all points yes I think
the neighbor version will be she
[Music]
so is it a wave since general
how do we look at or not as development
by development in a neighborhood but the
neighborhood is old we keep that and
there is there some aspirational
statement that makes that happen so we
don't just say development by
development or parcel by parcel so the
community as a whole develops the second
is I think some some folks like Raleigh
proper you've done a great job of
demonstrating their commitment to the
city and some that's gonna last
others don't necessarily have that track
record is their way of saying maybe in
the way of a for a developer list and
every else gets more measured as far as
requirements so that we don't end up
with the neighborhood that has all
apartment buildings that we can look at
something more comprehensive before we
get to that point
and goes
if we need to change anything if we
we need to add anything to
to do it so if we can go down the list
livable and go all the way down
is there is the language correct it's
the
can I ask a question is there so it
would be more readable if it was just
bullet points that were basically like
for the first one rather than saying
provide parks and trails that create
social opportunities if we just said
neighborhood parks and trails is there a
requirement more of the full scope in
order to make it more of a developer
obligation yeah that was what I was
concerned about because so I will take a
second to talk about that because I
think it's important because is this is
glimpse into my brain and Mel I think
likes it because it works for them so
the reason why it's number is so like in
a staff report you can say you know you
have to respond to 1.3 right so if
everybody knows that 1.1 1.3 is because
it's listed here as 1.3 as opposed to
just bullet number 3 right because
there's like a lot even know what bullet
number 3 means right so their number for
clarity for reference right and then you
know the more words and I Ron I love
less words if I could have less words
and make this readable in 90 seconds I
would love that but do you need to have
a certain amount of words for it to be
clear what's expected of somebody right
and so you know so the reason why it's
parks and trails it's not just provide
parks and trails because that doesn't
tell me why right it's provide them to
create social opportunities so now it's
like okay somebody says well yeah I've
got this trail and it doesn't go
anywhere and but it goes around the
building and I can say well yeah but
where's the social opportunities that
that trail is going to create so now it
gives you the opportunity to have a
a more in-depth conversation about what
the purpose of that is and they might
say well okay I provided that you know
over here in a different way and we
might say okay great there's
opportunities for social engagement over
here and you know maybe you don't have
to have a trail around the building you
know so so that gets back to having some
flexibility about this why it's not code
and why trying to write code for each of
these is a little crazy because it would
be a lot of code so that's the way these
are intended to work is it gives enough
clarity for an expectation but then it
gives the unique circumstances of each
project maybe resolve it in a different
way that is my question I have one
question and two times it just refers to
a couple times it just refers to Newport
I assume that's always Newport way it is
okay trying to keep this to a page I
don't know if that was part of it
I think that's one of the problems in
making this readable is just like there
isn't space between the sections just I
know you're trying to keep it to one
page trying to you to a page I get that
that's really hard to read it's hard to
read all right so part of it is I don't
think it actually I don't think I was
successful in keeping it to a page later
so give me very well be that maybe we
take measures of success out of kind of
those categories are out of the same
page just so that we have a little bit
more space to work with just widen the
margins
yes so I'm gonna like Kristyn work for
change either the font or something to
divide would be yeah this doesn't have
enough contrast with that okay those are
little things do you want to put
anything else in livable are you fine
with that
good 1.4 at the very end add two more
orgs look and feel so blend new
development with existing areas to
create a unified neighborhood look and
feel right because you're talking about
it you want something that is a little
bit more meaty so if you just left it as
a unified neighborhood well what is that
and if you say look and feel your
building needs to look like this needs
to be X color because all the other
buildings are similar color or your
parking lot needs to look like this to
match the rest okay so just to play
devil's advocate on that one what if
what you're integrating with isn't what
you want you could say I'm building next
to a storage unit I'm integrating with
that I guess I'm just thinking how do we
make sure that we're clear about what we
want new development to be versus what
we're working with that's already there
that
may not fit this future vision also I
think it's important that it's both you
not really unified and looking field but
also unified at present like
navigability and stuff like that so it's
a unified neighborhood in terms of how
you move from some block two blocks I
think I would I would oppose to add that
because I want to keep it unified as not
only doesn't feel like unified
neighborhood as you visually look at it
but also as you as you navigated whether
it's my car on foot but I guess I'm part
of that would be that the all new
development has to comply with the
design guidelines right so right that's
where we're picking up that is that true
ah yes so okay everything in Central has
to comply with your contextual manual
that just got adopted so there's gonna
be an architectural palette that you can
pick from and I think what this is is
really trying to get to is not about
gingerbread it's about kind of Vulcan
scale so if you've got a two-story
something and the guy next to it wants
to build it Tennant story something you
know maybe there needs to be some
transition or separation or somehow you
know it it wants to blend that blending
piece needs to get somehow thought about
and integrated into the new project
doesn't mean it has to be two stories
but it needs to somehow work its way to
recognize that what's next to it might
be of a smaller scale or a different
scale
so you're no baby in the file yes
my concern
as we can talk this from now until the
council keith is said we've we've we've
worked Smith going backward Smith it
again
now we've worked Smith it again and
depending on who's asking the question
we can work Smith it again and I'm not
sure pushing anything I personally think
it's a pretty good document right now
it's a vision as we've all said none of
this is gonna matter unless there's code
to enforce it and the developer could
come in and Ron says doesn't know
anything about it so probably wouldn't
come here who didn't know something
about it so far but it'll come to look
wants to develop and you can say oh yeah
okay I want to make sure that there's
affordable housing or a variable housing
wonder what that means
Keith can you tell me what that means
he'd tell and then he'd look into the
developer Development Commission would
ask the code to say what he couldn't
build this is becoming very frustrating
to me because we're just we're beating
this dead horse at some point we have
the reveal will be that graphically and
we need to move ahead and I don't think
we're going to get it to the City
Council if we sit here debate language
lousy I'm pretty comfortable with what
we've got right here and I think we
could expand the description I'm not
sure we accomplished we can put spaces
between everything and make it twice as
twice as long because of physical space
I don't know what we accomplished I
think we should just go what we've got
and perfume so I agree thank you and and
this is obviously a commission that can
have a conversation about that I am
happy to incorporate everybody's
wordsmithing suggestions I would love to
do that via email and you know what I
would say is maybe what we want to do is
focus our conversation about the future
description of each of these
neighborhoods because if that's wrong it
affects everything on the following
pages and if we're not capturing what
those neighborhoods want to be now I
think West Newports the easy one so you
know we're sitting here on this first
one and it's
probably the easiest one to capture what
its gonna be you know in 20 years
because most of its already kind of just
redeveloped and I think it's pretty easy
well we moved to Gilman and Pickering we
talked about with those are you know
down the field that's a much harder
conversation and so I think if we want
to spend time of value to Karl's point I
think maybe we just sit and let's talk
about the content of the future
description of these neighborhoods and
see if we got them right I just want to
I want to have a buy-in from that this
is what you want to go I wanted to but I
didn't want to Fort Smith what I wanted
to do is ask
additionally wanted to ask any of the
board take it out I'm I have a
clarifying question that might come over
adding something the public park that's
a measure of success the little park
that's gonna give built with the Gateway
development is that intended to be this
Park or the idea is that there would be
an additional park somewhere in the
neighborhood above and beyond that that
sounds like a loaded question what I
would tell you is there is a separate
part plan in central Issaquah plans so
they talked about where those mandatory
community spaces were right and so there
is one in in the Gateway neighborhood or
now in West Newport so the reason why
this is saying there's there's it's as
clear as there should be a park there's
because there's another illustration in
the plan that says there should be a
park here right now that is the park in
it's actually called Anthology now it's
the development area part of development
so eight weeks now Anthology so it is it
is that now there's been some
conversations the Park Department has
been
and I don't know if this came up in the
green necklace because I was
unfortunately over very short but
there's been some talk about maybe and
acquiring another parcel in West Newport
now I don't know if that's gonna happen
or not but if not then we're talking
about the park space in anthology that
was a long way to get to an answer sorry
okay so that I I think my life I think
my I have a question with the Commission
I think fits the spirit of what both you
guys are asking is that is our vision is
that that Park that's in the anthology
development is that the is that the park
that we want and then that meets the
vision of our neighborhood or are we
hoping that our aspirational visions
that there should be an additional part
somewhere in the neighborhood I think
there should just be a park whether it's
an additional
yeah well I think I think I'm asking
like when the anthology development is
complete and that Park is open to the
public would we consider that that
particular measures successfully
implemented unless there's something
else written I would say that would be
success okay
I'm okay with that I just wanted to
clarify so without any more
addition subtractions whatever is there
anything else on here that you would
like to change a specific things Ross
Jules and then question for you Keith
this neighborhoods have there are the
mountains of some trail is going through
this neighborhood should we have any
language in this document to embrace the
mountains of sound trails corridor or
something already here support to mount
stop
oh it is yes Roger is also indistinctive
and connected
it is I was actually looking to see if
it was part of our future description
that was one that was one of my comments
was I liked and connected down the first
bullet it under a measure of success and
connected which is presidents of Western
gateway find convenient safety
multimodal povo I think a sentence like
that should be in the future
paragraph yeah it doesn't have to be
exactly that but just something about
connectivity to the because it's because
of the location of Western gateway and I
think one of the things that we could
point out is a weakness of the area that
was I think kind of mentioned in the
today section the Cougar Mountain
trailhead is difficult to get to and
under parked I would want to see
something reflected in the future
concept the talks about how this has
become a gem of the neighborhood
destination yes for that locals can walk
to safely in regional you know was
enjoyed by people from the region okay
something like that okay yeah so you've
got that's kind of called out in
developer obligations in simply ashley's
you've got the childhood call Val yep
something you don't have the travel and
measure success show but now might might
be nice ad has a third bullet saying
what's our measure of success is it
under the distinctive column I think
that yeah you put in a string to Hoover
connected distinctive because I think
what Lindy's comments in people get to
it but that's fine I like that it's just
a signature reality it is a signature
Marco but I think you've got we find an
expenditure and so I think that would be
a mistake dude okay okay this is this is
where what you become anything else I
had a question on sustainable under City
implementing actions second bullet down
what boardwalk are we replacing in this
neighborhood it's it's the one so the
one the Gateway now Anthology built is
ours the board walk the boardwalks to
the boardwalk that goes over Tibbets
Creek from the new boardwalk that is
coming yes it's not actually it's not
built yet no but it's the Gateway that's
er yeah because we're gonna own it okay
and this is making sure that we can
replace it that like when it needs
your place is we don't do that very well
sometimes okay thank you
yeah not the s or 900 large that's what
I thought yeah after
so I don't know last meeting I talked
about qualitative language and saying
this says that you're gonna get things
it doesn't provide the quality of the
things and that was making me grumpy
last time but nobody liked or cared that
I was grumpy about that last time so I'm
happy to see her come along then the
next thing is uses right because one of
the frustrations in theory with with
gateway is it's not housing only and so
this picture basically continues it into
the future housing only with people
popping off into rally or central or the
central area for any other uses
do you yes so is that what y'all want
that wasn't the original vision of this
area so that's a significant change in
here so wanted to call it out because if
you look at this language and you say
what did we do wrong and just this
language correct what we did wrong if
you say that still needs to be mixed
used in the future you need to put that
in that so and I think what some people
would say that we did wrong is we
or this neighborhood we were never
getting gay I'm not judging I'm just
saying what do people think right
because that's the only that's really
the only significant change that I see
from the original vision this is just
fleshing out and and in theory making it
so you will get what you said you wanted
before more clearly because we didn't
get the park we we got this boardwalk
that we have to maintain getting the
transportation through was a bugger
because it was totally unconnected and
so I see most of the issues that we had
with this neighborhood to be resolved in
this document and that's one way I've
been thinking of it we just did it now
what was wrong would this solve the
problem and just one other way to look
at it but the big one
make sure use so I think this is a well
we don't call out a specific date I
think it's perfectly fine to consider
this document as kind of like a vision
2040 or something like that at which
case I wouldn't assume that any of this
would redevelop and therefore the idea
of putting in a vision that this is a
mixed-use area I just don't think is
reasonable I think if we had code that
said it had to be mixed-use if it was
redeveloped I think that's fine without
necessarily stating that in this midterm
vision so I don't know if these this
even allows from excuse if somebody
wanted to put retail or some or other in
their gateway would they be able to put
in their coffee shop haircutting salon
real estate office in a barbecue
restaurant so the uses are regulated by
the
and so I don't even know what zone
that's it's it's weird it's a weird pink
thing from salmon-colored it was this is
a warrant village residential and which
I assume would allow it allows for
resident retail and last week a smaller
scale stock so this doesn't give any
description of what that's patent needs
to mean if it needs to say anything so
for example if the three houses on
Newport get bulldozed and turned into
something else
you know the zoning would allow for that
to the number of things other than
residential you know does the vision
need to address that I don't know that
it does so in kind of reworking the
vision that I had using the categories
that I saw in the other neighborhood
stuff one of the sections was on
business in economy when I wrote that up
for West new part
I said residents will be able to walk to
local coffee shops and will have access
to a grocery store just outside of the
neighborhood something that that gives
the vision they this isn't gonna turn
into a mixed-use but that it would be
appropriate to see local small retail
yeah I think if you've got a sporadic
retail you would still call it a
residential neighborhood
I think that meets the vision and I
would think that any commercial use
would want to integrate well with that
with that kind of residential feel and
not be you know not just some chain
restaurant coming in and plunking down
on Newport in the middle of an otherwise
pretty friendly neighborhood so I don't
know how to get that in there or if
maybe it already is covered with
language so the reality is chick-fil-a
is not gonna want to go on new pork
right I mean you know I mean it's like
it's just not a retail sweet it
chick-fil-a's I'm gonna make money no
matter where that goes
I don't know we had the adult massage on
Newport Fred Fred shut it down okay I've
got one thing yell at me if this is Fort
Smith in that continent but on the
measure of success
multimodal access other parts of the
city I would I would add that you know
and also the greater region because it's
talking about adding transit service and
implementation actions and then in the
in the future statement talk about
access to points west and then the sound
trans I think I would measure success
it's not only can you very quickly get
else within the city but you can also
get greater in the region there's to be
because I think it would be great to
have the Metro routes that go through
here that aren't simple and shoulder
routes but just something that takes you
all the way to Bellevue or or the
islands or something like that
yeah and then meet you at the end of the
first boy and I think similar to that
idea the idea that one of the one of the
strengths of this is that it's close
enough to the Transit Center that you
can take advantage of that but you've
got the issue of that last mile
connection and so I know that's
mentioned in the bullets but I'd like to
see something up in the future that kind
of talks about this neighborhood will be
connected and such yeah I think that if
it's it's convenient access I read that
as meeting that that last mile
no major changes okay I don't know if
anything else so we're fine with this or
that those I have three or four
different things in it we need to add in
some way to the description in theory
what else do you imagine
in here anything specific you should
start a new portrait yeah
is there anything else in here besides
those few little additions that bring it
back to what
so okay great so and you guys are I
wrote down the things you suggested but
feel free to email additional stuff
Lindsay feel free to email so before we
dive into Pickering and Gilman so I
think one thing to ask you guys you know
for when we were talking about what
these things are going to look like in
the future you know I think because
they're part of the regional growth
center you know for me they they they're
kind of very close cousins I think we
see these as being our denser
neighborhoods you know the train
stations most likely going to be located
in the vicinity of these neighborhoods
you know and so as we got to as we got
to doing the kind of objective page I
just did one for both because it started
to and do be kind of mean if it wants to
be two separate ones
we can do two separate ones but right
now I love them into one because I
thought the things that were applicable
to Gilman really were
likeable to victory but let's start by
just kind of reading through I'm not
gonna spend time on today we know what
today is so the future for Pickering
rather than feeling Keaton
I have a comment on that is there any
reason so I like having just a single
single chart and then you still need
different future visions for the
neighborhood's would it make sense to
have a brief future vision for both and
have a sentence or two talking about
what the collective vision is and then
in addition to these two future ones
basically the little monologue you just
went on and I think I think that my see
you'd have Pickering today future Gilman
today future and then like Vickery and
Ann Gilman and you can have a future
that can just be one or two-sentence the
talks about that it's a single urban
environment it's connected kind of some
of the some of the some of the things
that we've that I think the Commission
was trying to envision we were trying to
slip this in as a single neighborhood
I believe chronological I think that the
the reason we're breaking them back out
is because I don't think council was
super amenable to that but I think we
can still put an A in addition to the
future statements we have have a picker
in Gilman future that doesn't duplicate
this but then talks about how I think
we're envisioning that it is up it is a
single a single urban environment fabric
that is then just two neighborhoods
together as one rude I like what you
just said but why don't we put that in
the beginning
and have a general this is what it's
going to be and then
oh sure if you wanted to top for the
bottom that's fine say the goal is to
create this as you know a unified area
while right now it is not so it is
broken out and well even though it's one
neighborhood it's so separate that yeah
I think there's thanked as good reasons
we're articulating them separately and
then I think the visions for them are a
little bit different but I think it
would be helpful and constructive to
additionally have a pretty name Gillman
vision that that's that's all I'm
suggesting and in the spirit of
wordsmithing what are we calling the two
of them together is it a neighborhood is
it a district I think because they're
they're both Pickering is a neighborhood
Gilman's a neighborhood pekurny Gilman
is there's a cress Center okay
that expense is mine oh so I think I
sent you a very confusing email about
this you know for a while there we had
districts and sub districts and they
were eggs and I think it was it was it
was there were too many levels so we
tried to back out of all of that so we
just dumped the district piece so now
we've got a sub area plan made up of
five neighborhoods these two
neighborhoods together generally the
regional center so that so the way we
could talk about sa the regional growth
centre will be a single urban fabric
that consists of two neighborhoods or
something like that
yeah we're constant words okay I using
they'll be helpful because also someone
looking at the document they're like why
do they stick these together yeah cuz
they because we did it with very strong
purpose I think sorry I jumped on that
really
and I can tell you why I have to go to a
different meeting so can I tell you why
I'm gonna run and you yeah the
infrastructure so I'm gonna sound like
ronon's benzene I read this listen I
this this is not either of those
neighbourhoods to me this is a mash of
the two and I feel like they are not
getting what they deserve you do not
have the connections showing through
here to Lake Sammamish state cart that
is going to be one of the core values of
that neighborhood and I think you need
to focus on the transitioning from this
odd cost go flat 56 though there's a
state park scenario and it needs to be
very specifically described to get
success on the other side you have your
new high density areas that are now
codified you must build this high and
you have your Transit Center and you're
supposed to transit oriented development
I don't think you can adequately cover
all of that using one chart and this
chart seems super thin to me thinner
than any of them because you're trying
to sort of generally spot between the
two so I emphatically and you'll hear it
ten thousand times if you don't do it
this way think - I may even sending
emails
I agree with what Connie just said the
same reasons what's gonna be divided I
like this one I think if we're gonna
divide it into two we should talk about
how important we think it is to connect
the two with you know we talk so much
about the transit hub being at the
middle and making sure that one side is
connected to the other and maybe it's in
that you know added paragraph or
whatever format it is you know each each
district gets its own attention as to
what it is but there's something that
focuses on what that what the gravy's
good yeah could we not to get too
excited but could we do this can we
break this into three so case because if
you look at it so if you're this is yeah
and this and this is why I liked it as
one if you would have a Pickering
section ago my section then you'd have a
brief pretty earning Gilman section when
you would say things like the divisive
impact of i-90 has been lessened and
stuff like that because they were and
then the one about the Sound Transit
beam it's really everything and they
connected a lot of that it applies to
both really doesn't apply to one so if
you're gonna break them apart
you almost need to have a third set that
applies to both I don't know if I matter
if I'm overthinking this but that would
be I would say let's let's break it into
tubes it's like and if there seems like
there's a missing link we can chat about
because because the other ways you then
simply have to have bullets just
repeated right that's right thanks yeah
cuz some of them are duplicate right
yeah no they're true for both yeah okay
because I like I look at like liveable
one through six like you would just have
the exact same sex in both both
neighborhoods I just I just got really
excited about this I had a question for
you on one point for under livable that
preserved the amount of non-residential
square footage as an as redevelopment
occurs as of what remember is that
parcel by parcel is that overall by the
neighborhood is it as of today or does
it evolve it you go right so this is
this is a huge one this is huge and it's
not true in that is it doesn't show up
in every neighborhood it just shows up
in a Korean Gilman and so the
conversation this is a high-level
conversation for y'all that kind of
plant your flag on is you know in these
two neighborhoods if you're gonna go in
and you know this is this is the Atlas
example if you're gonna go in and blade
an existing retail strip mall do you
have to replace the amount of square
footage non-residential square footage
in your redevelopment project on that
parcel on that parcel
so no net loss of jobs even if next door
they've built a massive retail cut
important first what well if they do it
as a combined project and sure but the
idea is if they're delivering those
stuff individually you have to each one
has to stand on its own and the other
challenge of being this that there's a
lot of small ownership in these parcels
right so right now so it's a big deal
this is a big one yeah yeah so this is
and if I own contiguous acres do I I
still have to play by those same rules
can I not move it over here and
something different over here so that's
that's the so this is where it not being
code has some advantage because you can
ultimately do the reasonable thing so if
if somebody says well you know I'm gonna
take out 40,000 square feet of retail
and build residential then the
conversations could be well where's the
replacement going to be and if you did
have another project underway or that
you'd already done maybe there is a
conversation say ok we netted out a
positive for job if you're truly gonna
build mixed-use that balances itself out
over time because of parking because
your residential and your commercial
have opposite parking and you have the
ability to do shared parking if you can
co-locate them within a reasonable
walking distance so that your parking
space can be utilized day and night by
different users and that makes the
project more economically feasible so in
moving toward a mixed-use model you have
a natural incentive to to do that but I
think the rub is that's great on a
neighborhood but then sometimes it's
tricky to pull off on a
project-by-project do you have your
requirement project so the different
developers can ultimately end up leaning
on each other as that as the new
development of parking comes in so this
is so the council already adopted code
for part of what would be the Gilman
neighborhood and that's the mandatory
vertical mixed-use okay but the rest of
its the rest of it so you know so take
for example Pickering and let's assume
somebody by you know where Barnes and
Noble and the leathers furniture store
is and wanted to build six story
condominiums what this would say is they
should build ground-floor retail or
commercial space or have an officer take
a story of building just right yeah so
this is this is intense this is a big
thing and so we should talk about
whether we think whether we think this
is appropriate or not well and if
they're building that ground-floor
retail space there's probably not
parking out in front of it because they
can't afford to put the parking spaces
so its retail that you'd have to walk to
of that same size do we do we want to
articulate why are we doing this is it
for neighborhood vibrancy and like
parking congestion I thought it was also
Ford that was also for tax reasons I
heard I'm looking at Ron and Mary Lou
was also very clear on this
is the concern is we we could lose a
significant number of jobs in our job
which is it's our job
you know Viki over the Korean Gilman is
and where we see most of our employer
code no no I think this is great I was
just I was just asking as a leading
question because I think the vision we
need to talk because because the
divisions we don't want to just be a
commuting suburb for the job centers
elsewhere in King County we want to be a
job destination in her own I really like
how it's not a residential so allows me
development to flip between commercial
and office space or whatnot
yes as if I see even hard space oh well
what's your baseline is it today's
square footage so if Costco builds and
adds on I don't know 800,000 square feet
of commercial space what does that mean
for the neighborhood does that change
the balance of what your will so let's
let's let's do a hypothetical so if if
Costco bought the theater and bought the
leathers and the Barnes and Noble and
Big Lots and pure ones to build you know
another office building because that's
expansion area for them
they would take out a certain number
square foot of retail and they would
build hundreds of thousands of square
feet of commercial yeah so they would
meet this because it's not you know they
are replacing it and then yes you know
the concern is
is if you know if a residential builder
bought the Big Lots and what used to be
the u-dub space and wanted to build an
apartment building they would have to
build ground floor non-residential even
if costco bailed 800,000 square feet new
door
really yes and you think that and you
think that's enforceable if this can
once it's not ready if we leave it like
this yes all right I like it I think I
think it's a big mistake
because you think it's twos beside so
the physical has been developed over
several decades in the suburban type of
fashion and the developments that got
built were built on that model and it's
now saying okay whatever amount of
commercial was built on that lot is
locked in forever
and has to be on that lot forever and
that's not a vision going forward that's
just saying they're going to preserve
that amount that that exact amount of
square footage there which may not be
feasible at all in crandall or ambulant
talked about there one of the aspects
they talked about was mixed to use and
they pointed it out specifically that
mixed-use doesn't work everywhere so if
you take a place like the leathers that
parcel and say okay you have to replace
that with commercial and you put
ground-floor retail there and there's no
retail customers coming there it'll sit
vacant so it's forcing stuff to go in
places just because it was developed
maybe 30 years ago that way so funell
could you argue that since I can tell
you that we don't have very much vacant
retail space in the valley floor now
that all of it is marketable right so if
you're gonna go and take out the
leathers and the Barnes and Noble
you know what used to be could you keep
to Katina and Katina and build something
else there can you make the argument
that that amount of square feet of
retail was marketable before it
redeveloped so why wouldn't it be
marketable after redeveloped if you
added six floors of housing on top of it
because those rooftops would go
downstairs and buy their coffee on the
ground floor I mean so I guess I'm you
know I agree we can't push for
non-residential where the market doesn't
want it to be right but in theory
everything that we have now is occupied
its leased and there's a market for it
now and as you densify and put something
above it it seems like that ground floor
space should still be marketable well
but as Carrie point in that right now if
you go there to go to Barnes and Noble
to buy a book right
I can drive there park my car walk in
get a book come out if that's
redeveloped as a residential development
with some ground-floor retail and I go
there in second where do I park well the
parking garage is for the residents it's
more difficult there's right there's no
walk through traffic things like that
another example I think could be say
cascade Business Park which is a is that
I think thriving it's over next to the
CenturyLink Yards so go for the park and
ride CenturyLink and it's the single
story
hip its incubator space
yeah so a development that's very
typical in a suburban model if that gets
redeveloped I can easily see that being
a multi-story you know five story and
maybe there's some ground-floor retail
at the street level in front of parking
behind it
but that wouldn't be nearly as large as
all the commercial development that's on
there right now and if you said you have
to put that much commercial development
in that building I just don't see how
that would work and so it's only it's
not that I'm against the mixed-use
development and keeping commercial I
think those are good ideas but the
codifying it this way in saying whatever
commercials on each parcel is the
commercial amount you would always have
there
I just don't think that works I hear
your point I'm an interesting
conversation with the friend of mine who
just bought a piece of retail property
in Pickering and he said it's he spent
six months trying to find a piece of
retail property in Issaquah that is
affordable and
he's not a huge shop but he does pretty
well he is considered maybe within the
top three for his particular shop within
the Puget Sound and he's having a hard
time finding affordable retail space and
as a quote we don't want to have such a
shortage of retail space that what is
here is so high that people can't afford
it then we lose out as a community
because then we don't have that retail
opportunity so diversity right not every
retail shop is gonna be a million dollar
shop right but if you build a brand new
buildings that retail is gonna be even
more expensive true but does he have
enough retail space than what we we
don't have an impact at retail models
what I'm trying to say right so if we
don't have enough space retails becomes
impacted and then it's a premium for
rent and then the retail space is that
we like to shop at can't afford to exist
here because because you're right if you
build a new building you're in ELISA to
Starbucks or someone else is gonna pay a
premium for your space what that does is
bring the Starbucks there means the
Starbucks isn't down the street which
then opens up space for someone else so
I think you're right even though the new
new development will be priced here you
Ranjan argue we want it we want to
ensure that there's still ample amount
of commercial space that makes this the
vibrant center it is and we don't want
that to a road I think the other point
is don't get too caught up on on retail
I think when you look at some of these
developments really my coffee shop
couldn't survive over there what's fine
you can put other things in whether it's
a medical office or some sort of office
space I think the fact that it's we're
not we're not looking to preserve retail
we're looking simply to preserve not a
residential which i think is a bit
broader which I think adds a lot of
flexibility and then I think the last
point I make is this is this is a vision
I think we have the same conversation
around vertical mixed-use I think if the
argument is oh well that doesn't
financially make sense for a developer
right now that's fine that just means as
parcels won't get developed until prices
continue to
as they will in the valley because it's
more physically constrained and
eventually it will pencil out to rebuild
those if having this requirement means
it takes longer for a parcel to
redevelop I think that's fine because I
think what ultimately gets created on
those on those parcels it is a better
fit for the vision we have for these two
neighborhoods because if you look at the
Big Lots yes if you put something in
there now it'll be very difficult to get
to
unless you're adding hundreds of parking
there's a parking spot start sides but
if that gets put in 20 years from now
people will just walk from the train
station so the vision what we want these
neighborhoods in terms of access and the
density can handle it was a lot
different 20-30 years from now that it
will and it is is right now so this is a
hard one I don't disagree with anything
any of the four of you have said about
this the problem with this one is if you
add flexibility you're not gonna get it
I think that the the concern that I have
it goes back to you know our friends
friends from Lennar who built Atlas and
their comment to the city was if you
want a ground-floor retail you should
have made us do it
and that's hard that's hard for a city
to hear that because then it's like okay
we're gonna make you do it you know if
you you know I've thought about the
words here to see if you could kind of
broaden it a bit and you know the
concern I have is as soon as there's an
escape door we're gonna get people that
are gonna say well I read this it allows
me not to do it I'm not gonna do it now
we could start there you can always
start in one place and look at it and
see what the unintended consequences are
so we could either choose to make it
more discretionary or flexible and we
can see what the next few projects come
or we could leave it as is and you know
see if nothing happens so there's a
choice there I don't have a crystal ball
I don't know what's gonna come but I
think you know the reason why it's only
included in these two neighborhoods
again I think part of this has to do
with the number of jobs and the number
of housing units that were supposed to
put in this area and be able to
accommodate and so I'm I don't know
but I can also argue the other side and
say well the council just went through
the vertical mixed-use conversation and
they did not include all of both of
these neighborhoods they just picked a
small swath south you know of tippets
and you know so you could say well
clearly councils said what they want
they want that not this this takes that
and adds another 300 acres to it I mean
because I made that up so you know so I
think but this is one of the big when we
go through these twelve pages of vision
this is one of the big ones this is this
is big and it's very absolute so I think
you guys you know this is about the
reason why we have a commission is for
the community to weigh in and to help
the administration figure out what to
recommend I I think it does fit with the
vertical mixed-use being only a small
footprint because I think it fits with
things loosely and as you move from the
center ok so the vertical mixed-use
requirement that's super duper rigid and
then you will refer the way for the rest
neighborhood you have a still somewhat
rigid but still a little bit more
flexible you can do like the like try to
point to a couple different properties
and then as you leave these two
neighborhoods then that that disappears
so I think the fact that the vert that
super-tight vertical my first
requirement is only a subset of neighbor
but I think actually makes sense because
you you you allow more flexibility as
you as you move broader right that works
well and this would allow somebody to do
like a four story office building
without having to
makes use Niki's you know you're not
requiring the addition of residential
right because I think we're assuming
that's gonna come
of our time with 1.4 as we've been
discussing I think what we've talked
about is that we want to make sure that
there is ground-floor retail but
preserving the amount of like this is
very specific the amount of non
residential square footage that's
already there right we want to keep that
so saying there's a big lots a giant
store right taking all that square
footage that building would have to have
that same footprint if you don't
necessarily want so I'd rather I'd
rather get rid of 1.4 in lieu of just
requiring ground-floor retail III distri
because I don't think grand for a retail
makes sense everywhere ground floor
non-residential
no because they think you can have
something where there's walk-up
residential and then on the other side
of the block you have office space would
it be would it be helpful to maybe leave
that in and then add a bullet under city
implementation actions and that the city
will work with developers to ensure that
one point four is delivered in like a
flexible manner something that makes it
clear that it it's not as prescriptive
as you have to meet your footprint but
that the city is tasked to work flex
would be to you know coordinating
parcels and do those kinds of things but
that would that be helpful to throw that
bullet in there so let's let's maybe ask
the question here because maybe we all
have different purposes what's the
purpose for one point for for you all it
is is it a vibrancy issue or is it a
jobs issue or is it I think it's both if
we don't enforce it we don't you know
let me back up for a second the amount
of square footage that we have there now
for commercial it's probably not enough
we need even more than what's already
there it's one for jobs economic
vitality it's gonna bring revenue into
the city it's gonna give a place for
these residents to shop at because here
we're talking about meeting jobs housing
and everything needs everything needed
in a day going back if we don't have
enough space for retail I'd rather have
too much than not enough because then
you have an impact and model and if you
have an impacted model those rents are
going to be even higher and they're not
going to attract the retailers or
commercial entities that will be able to
afford there and provide us with our
everyday needs we're looking at big-box
and higher end retail to afford that
space and I don't want that because
that's not a healthy economic model and
it doesn't it's not healthy for the
neighborhood because in people have to
get in their cars and drive
alright I'm off my cell boss
yes I would just encourage you to keep
some flexibility in there just in
looking at what Bellevue did when
initially they did require commercial on
the ground floors of their buildings and
as they spread out from their core what
they found was they'd get out a certain
distance and it wouldn't work nobody
would leased the space any kind of
retail any kind of commercial and so
they ended up resolving this and you can
see this when you drive and I can't
remember about the name what number the
street is but it's the one that goes
past the hotels you keep going into
Bellevue you'll see some apartments on
the left-hand side and retail was built
on the ground-floor of those apartments
but it has since been converted from
retail into residential because that's
the only thing that would work there but
the people that live in those units have
to keep their drapes closed because
they're on the ground floor right there
at the street level so but it's it's a
temporary thing once the light rail
station comes into the neighborhood then
it will become possible for more of a
commercial use to happen in those
buildings buildings change as
neighborhoods change and so it's
important to have some flexibility to
allow them to evolve to respond to their
surroundings retail will work well when
you get a critical density of people
that can walk to it but until you've got
the parking issue
we're very suburban right now and so
most of our retail does require drive up
access and without that a retailer can
struggle unless they have enough people
that can walk to them to survive Keith
would you consider work live apartments
to meet this requirement because I see
that a lot in some of the apartments
that go through Seattle where it's not
in the retail core and they have street
facing
work love apartment units that it is
zoned and you can either be in
apartments a good if we're gonna show us
a lot off sure I mean so we there are a
number of projects up on the islands
where the first floor are basically were
built to accommodate home offices and
basically live work so so is that is
that you know is that is that equivalent
I would say yes yeah I mean if you're if
you're designing in so that it basically
has that street front and openness that
you know somebody that would have a
basic business would use I think that
would be that'd be great I think that
would be we have a ton of home-based
businesses and it's a far right now
because I think that what they would do
well who are you're saying it's probably
be an apartment you have to start yeah
and then as intensifies which aren't you
know you know then maybe transition and
being more you know point though peccary
NAND Gilman are our economic central
hubs and we are talking about allowing
retailer allowing residential mostly
residential to be built there that's a
that's a strategic flaw we cannot do
that we have to hold our own and insist
a commercial and retail have the space
to build their aura will not happen and
when we're talking about 7,000 units
that's just what the first 15 years 20
years the reality is that can support
maybe a lot more than that
that's the capacity of bickering and
Gilman or just Pickering the regional
growth Center said both of them so but
that's a target that's not capacity
still a lot but I think around what
you're driving it is it's a job center
you know and we did the idea the vision
is we don't want to replace that with
residential we want to add residential
into it but can still keep and keep what
we have all right I said yes because of
also the vibrancy the energy of the
neighborhood has changed if it's a
residential it's can be quiet people
aren't gonna want to build retail there
but if you have both you create more
energy this is more of an economic
engine
so
not sure you have one voice yet no I
think maybe for those who are concerned
I think also keeping my you could we can
always back away from this it's it's
much easier to be too prescriptive and
then ease up than it is to allow for
development and then be like you know
maybe not so I think for those for those
who have pause keep mind you can keep
this and if we find it's it's not
penciling out and we have you know small
business owners who are screaming bloody
murder because they can't they can't get
done with anything get done I think will
hear that and that could be incorporated
in the next in the next planning cycle
you can always change
but we need commercial we need retail we
need a cohesive Navy
so so into Mel's point just one more
thing on this I think I think cascade
Business Park is an interesting example
and I guess what I would say is if this
is here what you'd end up happening I
think is you could you could build you
could split that parcel build an
apartment building on one side and an
office and multi-story office building
on the other and Eclipse the amount of
square footage that's there now you know
in a multi-story commercial space you
know as well I guess my but my objection
is then to that I understand what you're
saying it's I just looked it up it's 96
thousand square feet of commercial space
right now so I don't see any way you
could put 96 thousand square feet of
ground floor retail in an apartment
building there right and to me I'd look
at that overall it's a perfect spot to
put residential with the park the
Transit Center within walking distance
hotels retail I mean it's a purchase
it's it's where we would want high
density residential to go but we'd be
saying no you can only do that let's say
on the half of the property not the rest
of it we're going to force 96 thousand
square feet of commercial property onto
that side into my in my mind we're
starting to then create our zoning that
codifies what's there right now
but I think Eastwood saying it doesn't
need to be sight for sight and so I
think the challenge then is is if a
developer says I want to build an
apartment building then the city says ok
great
go show me where else you're going to
add incremental ninety six thousand
square feet within the neighborhood well
and then so then that it is more
difficult for the developer because
developer needs either acquire a partner
with another parcel but I don't I think
it's still written broad enough that the
individual parcel doesn't have to
maintain so but then you're telling an
apartment developer ok you have to go
build 96 thousand square feet of office
space on another parcel in addition to
any of the commercial space that was on
that parcel yeah and that doesn't happen
you're an apartment developer you're an
office developer the markets be
operating different differently an
apartment person comes in and says I'm
going to build an apart
I'll put I'm a ground-floor but that's
but but I think that's what that's the
most important thing the markets do
operate differently and that's why we
have this requirement we don't want to
be caught in a market where we lose all
of our commercial space just like we if
we were in a different market and all of
a sudden houses were getting raised
because we can offices office buildings
and all of a sudden way too short of
housing if that was the problem we had
we would write something that I would
say you have to preserve residential
space and some other neighborhood but
like it's like so this would never
happen but let's say housing was cheap
oven space was crazy high people were
houses and islands and tearing them down
and putting in office buildings if that
was happening and we were suddenly had a
shortage of you know we were losing the
character the highlands and there
weren't enough residential I can see
that the city would pass a code say hey
if you're gonna tear down houses because
you want to add offices because that's
what the market is dictating that's fine
but make sure you're adding like for
like residential that's that that's what
this is the markets are different the
market says residential pencils out
commercial space often doesn't and is in
where a sequoias right now in the region
and so then this this rule is
specifically because we're trying to
combat where the market is right now and
forced developers to meet the vision we
want and not simply meet what the market
once
Kevin banana I would still disagree that
you are forcing it on parcel by parcel
to do this instead of saying this is a
bigger vision you're saying your parcel
do you own that has X amount of square
footage commercial has to have X amount
of square footage commercial I know is
that true though
I mean this is really if I was on the
Development Commission reading this we
do we need to well that's why I threw in
the point about adding something on the
city implementation size to make it
clear that there is flexibility so so
this is this is where we're trying to
land this you know to Mel's point
earlier the way this is written I would
say if you wanted to come into Issaquah
and you're gonna build an apartment
holding project you know you you're not
gonna find vacant land and you're not
gonna find housing that you're gonna
take out most likely so you're gonna
take out something that's
non-residential so what this would tell
me is I've got to go to either East Lake
or confluence right I can't do it in the
regional growth center so that's the
first thing is that okay because that's
what this says if what we're trying to
do and that's I think we're run is what
we're trucking for what we're trying to
do is say that this is you know we're
gonna keep tabs on a neighborhood basis
so and I think this might have been
where kiri was earlier I didn't ask but
you know so let's say Costco builds six
hundred thousand square feet of office
space are we now in Pickering up six
hundred thousand square feet so then if
the next four projects want to wipe out
60,000 square feet of retail we're we're
on the plus side of the column so if you
look at it more as on a neighborhood
basis then you could as long as you're
never below the line you could let some
people redevelop as residential only and
take out you know you could take out a
non-residential space and not have to
put
back if that's okay you know we can
tweak the language to allow that but
right now the way it reads is if you
come in and you can take out the Holiday
Inn
to build apartments you have a problem
hotels are non resident non-resident
hotels or non-residential it would be a
lot easier as one person just came in
and bought the whole thing I see I see
the points that are being made yeah this
is this is complicated it is complicated
because this is multiple parcels with
different square footage of commercial
space on it and I think what we want to
look at is the spirit of the
neighborhood as opposed to the each
individual factual piece of property so
it's almost getting too granular and I
don't want to lose commercial space I
know I'll lose retail space and when I
mean retail it's not always necessarily
a bike shop or a Taco Time it could be a
graphics studio which would be kind of
commercial retail
but it could also be distributed
throughout so if we had someone come in
or a collective maybe create a co-op of
sorts where if developer came in and
wanted to develop the Lowe's building
and the big loss building and take out
the Petco area as well and create the
next fuse each parcel may not produce
the same square footage of commercial
but together they would still produce
similar or more commercial space right
people following that so that's kind of
what we're looking for I suppose the
same big lot sells we need to have in a
developer was to come in and develop
that into an apartment complex we're not
going to expect that much square footage
to be underneath that apartment complex
because that might be totally
unrealistic but you don't want them to
say well hey I'm gonna buy this parcel
Big Lots put a apartment complex and by
the way I have another parcel off in
Highland so I'll put my commercial up
there because then you're taking it
you're taking the commercial out of it
the bickering area that needs to be
there and moving it somewhere else
within the city and I don't want that to
happen either because I know that
happens
I think when you talk about how someone
who would suggest build an apartment
building will look here and say no I'm
not going to do that go someplace else
think that's fine I think that's the
vision we're looking forward I think you
know your big national home builders
might look at this environment say I'm
not gonna fall I'll do my development oh
I think you're more local development
companies whether it's a Vulcan or
something smaller than that I think they
would be much more based upon the type
of development going on in places like
Seattle and Redmond those those projects
I think meet that and I think what
mystic war aspires to do is to have in
these two neighborhoods the type of
development that right now is coming in
the pipeline in places like Redmon's
over Lake neighborhood I feel like what
were like and a desert is pretty similar
and those ones sometimes developer who
pulls together a full block and has
apartment buildings and office buildings
and so even though it's not like for
like the net-net
is you're adding residential while also
adding the the non-residential anything
that needs your question please I don't
the way I read this is if Costco adds
energy thousand square feet and then two
years later someone's then developed the
Big Lots parcel I don't think they can
point the Costco because they didn't
they didn't contribute that I I
interpret it as that that each
individual development action needs to
needs to have no net loss now that can
be coordinated across parcels and across
developers that you know maybe do some
handshake agreement or kind of point to
each other I think that's fine but I
don't I don't think one developer can
say well those guys built an office
building two years ago or so
I'm scot-free for my development I know
that's not a howl or anything but rather
with what you just said is that
developers won't get together because
one development comes in and then maybe
two years later something else comes in
and it's not coordinated
but we're providing a financial
incentive from them to coordinator cuz
if I'm a developer and if I am told
brothers or Lennar and I want to build
an apartment building I'm gonna go
figure out how to go find someone else
that wants to build an office building
because that's what I have to do in
order to make money off of this
apartment building I want to make though
I think people will figure it out
it will happen even if now's not the
right time it will happen
this property is way too valuable
and when st3 comes in it's not gonna be
a Lowe's it's not gonna be empty it will
happen
it's just when the right time happens in
the right chemistry of people come
together and if we create language
that's too soft we're not gonna get what
we want when the time comes and in time
may come very quickly or the time may
come 10 15 years from now so are you
looking at this as an a
because I can't see a neighborhood with
apartments or condos right next to a big
commercial building next to a another
apartment building how that creates a
neighborhood I would rather see
underneath where you can walk and you
have parks in the middle and you can
create a neighborhood so I'm having a
hard time because that's what but that's
what that's what mix used is mix uses
and just apartments and coffee shops
I mean mix uses I'm you go places like
you gotta like Redmond you know if you
see it in Bellevue and they have small
apartment buildings and next to it is
you know a 20-story office tower now
that's not a leafy residential
neighborhood because that's that's not
what quick reading Gilman are I agree
with this if we were looking at
confluence and someone wanted a drop-in
eight story medical office tower that
would not fit with the intent of that
neighbor it is because it would be
disruptive to the residential space
that's there but I think in Pickering
Gilman it is a more urban space and
having office buildings and whatnot I
think is an appropriate use because it
keeps it airy very active during the day
and then will drive all the foot traffic
for the for the for the shops and the
restaurants and all the other amenities
that are in procreating Gilman it's
gonna be quite different than it is now
I think it's what the vision is so so
this is so what I've been saying for
Pickering and I think if we're
successful those spaces will be utilized
I mean right now
what I can tell you is so like I can I
can you know what's been going through
my head it's been our building right you
look at our building and you look at one
of the most likely buildings to
redevelop and figuring that would be our
building right and so the question is so
you got 24,000 square feet of office
there now and that would be a place that
I could see a five-story apartment
building happen and so you know if you
could you know if you said you just had
to have ground floor non-residential
space they they build that and some
retailers would go in there and you know
be whatever it is maybe it's a dry
cleaners and a something but 24,000
square feets an interesting conundrum
that's that's a big space so the
question is you know if you wanted to
build apartments in there and you were
gonna take out our floor our building
you know okay now I got to build you
know so the footprint of whatever gets
built there would probably be big enough
to do it on one floor would be my guess
because that building is kind of
smooshed to the back of the property and
well and you'd have to do it on one
floor because typically in those
mixed-use building right they don't want
to share elevators for security presence
so you've got to have a whole separate
core for residential than you do for
commercial but the thing with that and
this is a little bit to Ron's point
earlier so if it's marginal space from
the get-go because there's not enough
other rooftops around in they did really
good space it'll be in the lower price
point right which gives opportunities
for certain retailers that might not
otherwise be able to afford to be in
Pickering
but also Costco has its own weird
dynamic
that there are vendors from all over the
country that want office space
approximate to Costco because they then
at Costco and so if I would guess with
you if a builder built 24,000 square
feet of spec commercial space it would
get filled up by Costco vendors and they
and the apartments would be above so if
part of this is about jobs the number of
jobs in my building now would be
replicated with the new space you know
what it is and that could change over
time maybe it starts off as commercial
space but then at some point it becomes
more vibrant for it to be retail maybe
it wants to be you know restaurants and
other things later those kind of spaces
can transform that way but the building
itself once it builds so if it built as
a straight apartment building it would
be there for the next 50 to 75 years
before anything happened to it okay you
know the interesting thing that you just
brought up is essentially when you're
building for commercial on the ground
floor you have taller ceiling heights so
as long as you build your ground floors
with those taller ceiling heights they
can be anything over time
so now how would you change how would
you change it that would work for the
Development Commission and incorporating
capsulate everything - we've been
talking about any suggestions on how
well for the Development Commission the
way it's written is clear I would
interpret it would be an easy one to
interpret and personally I I would just
take it out but I'm not on the
commission but that was I think there's
other ways to incentivize commercial
development downtown in the core that if
we wanted through incentives to
developers whether its high other things
yeah but to put something in that will
lock into place a certain amount of
commercial square footage on each law
well again I think I don't think it
gives the Department of the city enough
flexibility I think it comes back to the
spirit of the neighborhood and the
amount of square footage for a lot I
don't know if that's aI don't know if
that's a great way to look at it being
so granular as opposed to looking at
maybe from a 30,000 foot level the
neighborhood needs the square footage
the parcel may not necessarily have to
provide it exactly that spec maybe could
provide half in in collaboration with
another landowner who's going to build
an apartment complex with shared
commercial space on bottom as long as we
don't shrink the amount of space in that
again even gets back to the idea that
are saying okay for this spot we've said
we have to have this amount of
commercial in this location well when I
look at location I am looking at
Pickering as a location that's the
neighborhood we don't want to lose the
amount of commercial and retail space
that is in that neighborhood today if it
it should be equal to or more than what
is there now but if a developer wants to
sell the Big Lots I'm just using big
loss but if someone if that landowner
was to develop into a an apartment
building
I think a portion of that which should
be commercial but that's a huge store it
would have to be a humungous apartment
complex to accommodate that much
commercial space and I'm looking at it
from the spirit what can we if if he's
going to remove some of that commercial
space where is that commercial space
going to land in that neighborhood and
you have to have a receiving party to
work together to make that compromise
and again I guess I would get back to
that premise of saying all that
commercial space we we're now saying it
has to be preserved like historical
preservation that we have that square
footage has to be preserved within the
city because again if Costco builds
600,000 square feet of office space we
have a lot more jobs that come in do we
now go back and rewrite the code to say
we can we have 600,000 square feet of
space if people could buy you know could
you buy credits for how much office
space Costco built or replaces all right
well let's play devil's advocate let's
say the all the wayon owners got
together and developed the entire
Pickering area and they went with
commercial space down below and Costco
says great I'll take all of it we have
mixed cues but we have all one brand
underneath that we have no retail how do
we fix that how do we prevent that from
happening because I don't think there'd
be a very vibrant neighborhood that
would be a very tall neighborhood
so I do you have anything well I have
two thoughts and neither of them are
solutions so I sorry about that in
advance but I mean first of all for me
we're talking about you know commercial
all that I mean for me it's more about
jobs and we go but keep going back to
the Big Lots example like not that many
people actually work at Big Lots it's
huge but not that many people work there
and so I wish there was a I mean I don't
think there is but I wish we could use a
jobs metric here instead of a square
footage metric because I think I mean
really you talk about the the you know
the vendors Costco vendor idea I mean
that could actually create quite a
number of jobs in a very small space
compared to a big-box store that has you
know five people working there in the
evening um so I don't know if that if
you can even do that but that might help
and then the the other thing is I mean
so originally I was just sitting here
kind of listening and and somehow
agreeing with everybody I don't know if
that's possible but I mean I think the I
agree with the idea that we're really
talking about the neighborhood like
what's happening in the neighborhood in
terms of number of jobs we don't want
the jobs to go some to another name to
an adjacent neighborhood or another town
but I've
I'm also finding a hard way to figure
out how do we do that without regulating
it at the parcel level so you know I
mean as much as we want people to
coordinate in there to be you know
discussions and handshakes and all that
I mean in an ideal world I think that's
true but I don't think in reality and in
time and space that doesn't really work
out and so by forcing those
conversations I think that that helps a
little bit but I still don't think it's
seamless and so again those are two just
Saab survey shion's and not solutions
but I wish we could use a jobs metric
instead of the square footage metric and
then if there was a way to I mean I
don't think we can get away from dealing
with a project big project unfortunately
and even though it's constraining so if
you take off preserve the exact same
amount of non-residential and added some
way that addresses either jobs or
we encourage commercial or we something
some other way of saying we want to have
commercial in there but not at a
specific one for one is that what I'm
hearing you guys say these are robust
employment centers I have a suggestion
because we were kind of hung up on this
one thing and we still got a lot to go
through maybe we should take that off
line as a homework assignment and circle
back to it next week I was gonna suggest
very similar except ask staff to see if
there are any any other options or
things that we can sit should consider
something that other cities have done as
a way to preserve their jobs or like
commercial square footage because I
assume we're not the only city who has
dealt with a housing boom and the
results of that so a couple things one
is if you guys wanted to do jobs we
could do jobs that's why I asked you
guys if you if it was about jobs or if
it was about the amount of square
footage the vibrancy cuz you could have
a lot of jobs and you know they're all
day jobs and they all go home and I even
it's not very vibrant and so that's
that's part of it but we could do jobs
because then you could then you could
definitely the big-box my equate to if
you have equivalent jobs you know it
might be a smaller you know restaurant
or something that would have a similar
number of jobs as a big bucks
does to Lindsey's question part of the
problem we're facing is that the zoning
allows everything right you know if you
wanted commercial you could have
commercial zoning and you could only do
commercial there
and we wouldn't have to have this
conversation because it's like okay half
of this is now just read it's commercial
and you have to do commercial there and
if you don't like it you go somewhere
else right now though our zoning allows
everything and so what we're trying to
do now is to actually provide some level
of control over zoning which is very
broad and allows a lot of different
things so so I don't know to answer your
question I don't know specifically I'm
another city that's gone in and tried to
manipulate something in this way it's
really not the right tool the right tool
would be to rezone it but I don't think
anybody's wants to do that I think we
like there's some benefits to having the
kind of wide open zoning and I think
we're just trying to put some edges to
the box so that's kind of a long answer
to say no I don't think I'd support
something workers like square preserve
the amount of square footage like for
jobs you simply have to be one or the
other threshold that seems that seems
reasonable that allows some flexibility
yep that's what we need
yeah and maybe something in the measures
of success that says you know we at the
end of the day we have more help more
housing and more jobs right that would
be a measure of success I don't know if
that's enforceable on a parcel by parcel
basis but well that's part of the vision
the measures of success are after the
fact looking at you know how are we
doing right so if you added that I think
that's a great suggestion is then as we
track along you know you could say well
where are we are we in the you know has
Costco allowed us to be in the in the
plus column and then where's the housing
yeah I think I think that's super
important because we've got the
diversity of housing options as a
measure of success but the fact that
we've maintained and grown jobs and
neighborhood I think would be another
great measure success how do we measure
vibrancy so you have daytime and evening
vibrancy in a neighborhood so that it
isn't all daytime commercial/office jump
we have well what is the last bullet
point in city implementing actions and
livable it says work for day and night
activities
where's that sorry the third bullet
point under liveable and city
implementing for isn't a great way of
describing it whose words are this
because I think that I think that bullet
is hitting the day and that you guys
yeah but I don't so I'm not yeah so and
I don't know how the city's doing that I
you know
I mean I would almost push that one down
to measures of success I mean that is
that one that I think we were trying to
talk about because I mean I'm not I mean
this the city's not gonna program you
know evening concerts and Pickering I
just I don't maybe we will at some point
could you use a word like facilitate so
whether it's program or because like one
one thing that's you know that wouldn't
allow for people to do nine activities I
mean I mean that takes into account
things like like NORs noise audience
noise ordinances and what not like these
NIT knees and every words that are
supposed to still be lively in the
evening unlike anything the other
neighborhoods doesn't that cover it when
you just say vibrate neighbor
no no but I think the fact that it's
talking about night activities being
called out you can be vibrant during the
day and then just shut down at night I
don't think that's our vision
it looks like like that like downtown
valise hoppin during the day and there's
program activities and there's food
trucks and whatnot and then it just
shutdowns don't
but what I like city is to do anything
it just has to be open to it
so I guess let me let me kind of pull
the crowd is there a desire for kind of
a day and night activity level in
Pickering and Gilman I would think
that's appropriate okay so let me let me
try and add something mean in terms of
kind of day night vibrancy see what we
can find
- maybe populate that I think it's a
missing piece cuz I know and I don't
know if it was big enough for this but
I've read about like cities have like
nightmares mayor's in ma y ou R 9 IG HT
ma re for where they have where they
have like in position and this makes
more sense if you're a city like Seattle
but they have someone in city staff and
I think something that's elected
sometimes it's just a position and their
job is to kind of be the point person
for all the city services and permitting
for all the evening and nighttime stuff
that goes on so they recorded a night
owl service and it's your permanent and
make sure
there's Lisa Street cleaning during the
night and what not I mean I don't think
I don't think it's going to get to that
point but like you can have there's ways
for cities to go out of the way to
ensure you know the city's vibrant and
services are being delivered outside of
the nine-to-five so the city of
plummeting action might be support both
daytime and nighttime activities or
something along those lines Center
wouldn't you get that vibrancy
retail restaurants whatever
would you need you need it's a chicken
and a you need res even disease at
Hearst and in the restaurant so right
now you have the daytime population in
Pickering with the offices and the
retail you know you could guess that if
you added a thousand housing units that
those restaurants would be busier at
night and then maybe some more would
come in because of that round-the-clock
are you poor what's their soccer fields
and the set of links to interstate park
that have lights you know if you're
having an eleven soccer games going on
at 7:00 p.m.
so we keep trying to get a bowling alley
nobody nobody wants to build a bowling
I'm on the holding alley would be great
I still say like I'm one just final note
on that the day time I think I'm not
really sure the city has a role in that
no I'm moving it to success I think I
mean I think if we if we're successful
with what we want right we will have a
vibrant day and night time neighborhood
okay I was gonna kind of dim it I was
looking at some of the stuff talked
about engaging with the State Department
there's no language here engagement with
Eastlake with the East Lake neighborhood
yeah and sharing that Pickering and east
lake access each other well from from a
connected standpoint so that may be
something that is rediscovered when we
break this into two it may have been
something that got overlooked when we
plumbed it into one so when we're
pulling it out to - that may show that
may show that I want to make sure we
want the State Park to engage well with
bigger
just like that board then ending their
thing while we talk mr. grannies gave
themselves and I think a lot of us are
for difference it's a second why not
yeah it's going to achieve a petition
you have this bar chi-x meeting yeah
well the next meetings supposed to be
confluence in East Lake well actually so
is the next meeting confluence in East
Lake yeah and then we're meeting with
parks again right I think it goes parks
and parks isn't tomorrow
oh that's right we have still more weeks
of it in February first yes so yes I
think I think I think the changes that
you guys are suggesting on these
neighborhoods aren't that dramatic my
hope would be that I could get you guys
these changes and the other two
neighborhoods tomorrow so next steps is
but then you guys have to give me your
edits and so it's whatever if we're
gonna get them out to you again that
quickly it won't have your guys's edits
in it so it's your choice either I can
hang on to it for another week and you
guys can give me edits or I can get you
something back that you can then edit
away and so if you want to wait then
you'll have another version too like
your edits or two I don't I hope there
are no
additional evidence well 1.4 we haven't
decided on 1.4 that's tilde no I heard
our jobs were cops
we're jobs so unless we're gonna talk
about that hordes we're adding more jobs
yeah I mean my recommendation would be
that for the next meeting we could we've
just spent I think this has been a good
exercise for these two but if we could
all do that for the next two and either
get them to you before the next meeting
or just you know come in and we can go
really fast if that's why I say that you
know I'm not gonna be here
waiter here then when you're in you're
in you're trying to think of things it
it opens up so much more and we have the
discussion from the development
condition
it's more static when you do it that way
but you looked at I'm assuming you've
read through this and we picked out the
big things and change things I don't
expect to come back next week and have
45 Evan Atta teeth and so what I would
like to see is the things that have
separated and put in the changes that we
wanted and then we're going to talk to
AJ and his gonna say right I had to I
had two things I wanted to potentially
okay they connected one one on the Miss
a transit station one thing that I was
passionate about it not only is it an
even with focal point and amenity they
can talk we talk about who's being
- but also that the station itself was a
way to give between the two
neighborhoods so I don't I don't know if
you guys think that's that's necessary
or if that's harder particularly here
but I think it's right now okay I'm
sorry I was actually unfinished sentence
that my vision is the this train stages
and some that should get to but it also
is a yet another way to make I nine a
more permeable between two neighborhoods
so I think I think that's something
that's something important that conveyed
that could end up being quite a
different architecture design and then
the second one was something that I
think I had floated before I don't
remember how a minnow people were but
from Wall Street I really like the idea
of that potentially being a non car
street and so I won't know whether you
thought that this language was the the
mall street that doesn't exist on having
that potentially features like a pure
true pedestrian promenade with tree
facing retail is that something that
that as written that would be possible I
want to make sure it doesn't it's not
written such a that's just like oh
what's good it's gonna be a street so
there's gonna be cars and then I
wouldn't mind saying pedestrian oriented
I don't think there's been a decision
that it would be good I don't I don't
want to commit to having no cars because
that would be way too early to do that
strong if I just want to make sure that
that is a possibility that it doesn't
so right now right now it says that
[Music]
so right now the second bullet under
distinctive says mall street has been
constructed to be a neighborhood amenity
now that's fraud and I guess the
question is do you want it dialed in no
I don't think so because I think that
wasn't covered in the mall Street
prominent plan I just wanted to make
sure that it wasn't prescribed that it
had to be car accessible no okay
I don't know that we know that much
about that yet no no I don't think so
either
well it for those of us that are still
making Li d payments on the improvement
of these this team all Street and have a
few years to go but don't pay that off
you might have a look at this let's
don't change it right away so I I had a
question on three point one yep you're
doing a new crossing across from West
Newport yes where's that so so gateway
anthology has an landing yes and so it's
going across its ninety cost i-90 right
and it'll land somewhere in what's now
nickering so to be over by like the new
point it'll be it'll be it'll be
probably somewhere close to Greenwood
Trust property would be I guess yeah is
it in the neighborhood
West so we extended Pickering when we
when we I'm just a confused by the West
Newport reference yeah well that's the
start
okay so Southwest Newport okay which is
now anthology the apartment complex it's
it's a pedestrian bridge so to get to
from Newport you would first have to
walk the three quarter mile gotcha
public access in the Newport thank you
histology whatever then you get to the
bridge to cross over gadget access
another sidewalk or whatnot
Thanks
and then 4.3 was my other one I would be
lovely to construct the mobility
improvements before anything is done but
how are you gonna do that who's gonna
pay for it well right now that's under
the developer obligations right so I
think I think what that says to me is
well there's how you gonna do that this
says a lot more to me than what it says
what this says to me is that yeah that
one says I won't pay my mitigation fee
yeah I know so right so right now
there's a disconnect between impact fees
and concurrency projects and geography
yeah they've been they've been when he
connected yeah and I think you know and
probably over the past three years since
we adopted simplified concurrency
probably worked out as poorly is it good
just because all the projects got built
in two places either Newport or seven
and so and so the question is I don't
think we're suggesting this early that
currency changes but what this would say
and maybe that actually needs to be
moved down to city obligations that the
city needs to maybe look at making its t
IP a little bit more closely related to
the development projects they're
happening exactly right now it's not
right so I can move that down I feel I
don't mind living that down because I
think that's probably where it goes I'd
one comment Keitha you mentioned the
importance of the future statements and
I don't think I saw neither one of them
a discussion of the overcrossing mi9 in
connecting the two neighborhoods it's in
the this portion but I don't think I saw
the division and that and that might be
to a Jays point earlier when he was
lobbying for a third section so talking
about the Regional Growth Center maybe
as one thing so maybe there wants to be
a paragraph about what we envision that
being with this crossing this new
crossing of i-90 being Mac connector
piece which might also coincide with the
sound transit station which will become
a destination and a hub for both
neighborhoods that that's been part of
our conversation here but has been
somewhat lost in the in the text and so
that I don't disagree with AJ that that
might want to show up in some form so
maybe there's a connected paragraph of
the future regional growth center before
we dive into each neighborhood
description and then
in the neighborhood descriptions that
should mention that that whole
neighborhood needs to connect back to
that hub to then right yeah or in some
way should be some language in both of
those yes and then one last thing under
distinctive for measures of success
you've got redevelopment densities allow
for the realization of the regional
growth center housing targets might
it'll just add add jobs targets yes
Keith when you circulate these in
addition to PDF because you is ancient
you could provide these in Excel or
publisher or whatever probably using
just from an edit standpoint it might be
easier to just like track changes and
send you the file back yeah we could do
that thank you so we have them in this
word document that's perfect cuz you
have you sent us Word documents or do I
send PDFs
yeah you could send the word though yeah
that might be easier so I had brought up
at the beginning the idea that I think
the future paragraph should be split up
into the subject areas that I think are
important and are reflected in the other
cities neighborhood visions that I
looked at I can send to Keith that as my
edit but I kind of wanted to pull the
idea of saying we should have a section
on connectivity and mobility in order to
very distinctly call out what
connectivity looks like sorry where is
that going in the neighborhood or before
the in the future sense your description
so the idea of being able to maybe flesh
out the future idea of a neighborhood a
little bit more and call out the
specifics that are related to parse
connectivity but isn't isn't that the
whole point of the measures of success
section
I don't know I kind of feel like you
would just take those bullets and then
just repeat them in a paragraph form
which is fine for a readability
standpoint I think your staff and I
might billing the ones that like bullet
points in the room but I don't I don't I
don't I don't see how you would any like
anything that you would want to add to
that paragraph that's not covered I feel
like I would take that as where the
witcher stat is to pull it so it might
be a great exercise to do to kind of get
your thoughts organized but then if you
find yourself adding something to that
paragraph then maybe that maybe then
your actual feedback is okay that we
need to add a bullet to a particular
column and the measures of success
my vision is articulating something
specific that I don't yet see I think
part of my problem for now is the idea
that because of the format of the column
dariya I just find it really hard to
read and so I want that stuff easy to
read in the paragraphs but maybe that'll
change based on the formatting of that
actually a valid point because I look at
this and it's hard to understand it's
hard to it's difficult to read not hard
donors
to different audiences you have very
analytical and very qualitative and so
one likes more of story and more sales
document like myself and then someone
else you know AJ's a numbers guy may
like the number site so I like to see
I'm not like pull into the idea of the
different users of the document that
you've got the residents who want that
story and then you've got the developers
and staff who want the details
what can we hold people to and what our
requirements I like to see it I can give
us yeah I think I had done one for
Wesley smart yes so send it Joe is
looking at me like more work okay I was
just trying to to time
then back and forth and in one of the
sentences it says something about
will create a daytime vibrancy room
which will be matched by the nighttime
activity
residents that so the night and day is
actually already corporative in Tibet
the future
as our wasn't should be if you're going
through and you find something that is
not highlighted in this you can add it
but I don't think it has to be a
one-for-one or you know it's specific if
it's a general thing in the first future
thing but I like the fact that you know
you have it in there and they have
a city success
it's getting more logical yeah he's
getting my uncle so easily begin it's
always you know out here and then you
come into a point where it actually
makes sense so I don't think it needs
four or five paragraphs but I think it
needs to have a little bit more fluff
yeah just a little bit to to accomplish
a little bit and I you know I don't
think that we have to necessarily be
exactly look at things like Bellevue
Redmen because I hope their cities are
completely different than them they have
been flat areas where they can do
whatever they want we have a small
congested area you know we can't really
do that much with when you really think
about it so I think we're we're pretty
well there I would change some of the
way it's written but I don't think it's
enough to make a difference
not the idea is just some of that
more consistent
with that do we have some
anything else that anybody wants to I
just like say I think on behalf of all
of us that are not Commission members
that we really appreciate the ability
that is departing the discussion thank
you your own function and we appreciate
you absolutely here and I think that
when you guys put together the task
force I think you did a a really good
job and I think that step on your toes
by but I think we're coming to basically
kind of the same areas only getting into
a point where the city can actually use
it and go forward I don't think we're
coming up with any new ideas we're just
kind of taking what you'll have it's all
in the room yeah so next time you'll
have I would like to go over the know
just making sure like ten minutes and
the next meeting and just making sure
that everything works and then go into
the next to yes
trying try something out there are you
closing up do we speak we have a lot of
language about making SR 999 T better
with 900 drinking and 990 becoming more
permeable the intersection is a giant
footprint is there anything individually
one about fixing the actual interchange
to make it less of a giant chunk of land
or is the kind of the vision is like the
giant circle offering on-ramp like
that's we're kind of just stuck with
that and we'll just build around it no I
do we open watch done it is why's that
yeah so I'm sorry John
you know we focused on the visions for
the neighborhoods right but to your
point there's there is there is language
in here that talks about trying to
remove the barriers that right now
exists between moving around in the
neighborhoods I'll go back and look at
that I think it's a valid point
I don't know I'd have to go back and
read to see what we've got in there at
the end of the day it's gonna be the
city working with washed-out to try and
do those kind of things because we're
doing you guys are working closely with
them on but in front tree interchange
right so it would certainly be in the
east lake so we tried to do so we could
carry so we tried to revision SR 900
when we were working on the rally
development agreement and we got far
enough into it to start talking about
you know could we turn it into a
Boulevard
with a landscape median and and then it
just got really hard and it just and it
just was one of those things that we
just lost energy so this is this is the
place that you want to put stuff like
that because it's a reminder that yeah
we should be having those conversations
so let me look at that
and I'll specifically kind of see if it
needs more we don't we talk about those
a lot but I never did a lot about 9:30
sound walls and damages and whatnot what
if the interchange itself and their
their policies in the central square
plan that talked about that too but
you're right bringing it to the
forefront as a reminder to do that oh
yeah go look at those policies that are
in the plan
we in st3 comes in if we highway that
would be a great excuse to change that
whole area because we're already working
with lifestyle we're trying to conform
to sp3
it could be it's a heavy lift but if we
don't if we don't work on a nobody will
master good idea okay sorry I see you
result Joan you're saying good ideas
great great idea actually
okay don't go back to what I started say
so next week next week we'll spend just
a short amount of time to just because
they're gonna keep it's going to send it
out ahead of time but if there's
anything else you want to change or in
we I want to see it done I like to see
it done I don't want I want to make sure
that that's what you've said in
and then we can do the next two the same
way we're doing it now
collaborative and we kind of go over
going
yeah so you know and and and the way
that this worked out I mean we did get
into details but you know spending time
talking about the future of Eastlake
make sure we all agree with how we
painted that and then the future of
confluence because we haven't really
talked about either those two
neighborhoods very much so making sure
that we look at those visions for what
the future of those two neighborhoods
are that's the big thing we need to get
right all the kind of details then fall
out of that so as long as we get those
kind of bigger visions right that's what
we need to be okay okay so it is time to
close this meeting but I do want to make
one comment for anybody who actually
watches this on television now is the
time to apply for Commission's we will
have at least four open seats and so I
would love to have people from the
chamber community who are interested in
contributing to what we've talked about
tonight in the future the city so please
do apply would love to
encourage more people to be part of our
little round table here so I dropped a
date is February 28th what drop-dead
date is February 28th for applications
uh well that can always be moved a
little bit but please have your
applications in as soon as possible it
doesn't take very long you just have to
go online and it's a few of those
special buttons and answer the questions
and we will certainly take all
applications seriously so please do so
with that I'm going to close the meeting
at 9:10 thank you very much