good evening and welcome to the
September 13th meeting of the Planning
Policy Commission the night we're going
to start our discussion of the comp plan
amendments the city has one chance every
year to make any additions and we're
starting our discussion right now we're
going to talk about land use parks open
space and trails but first we have to
have a little motion I move to approve
the minutes August 23rd 2018 a second
second all those in favor say aye
I posed hearing then the motion carries
but with that I'm going to ask Kristen
to explain what we're gonna talk about
tonight I would be happy to but first I
want to give you a quick update so
recently you all made recommendations to
the city is it I think it's on oh so
recently you all made recommendations to
the City Council regarding the Old Town
sub area plan and the table of permitted
uses 4.3 be in the central Issaquah plan
and just as an update those have both
moved on to Landon Shore we took those
to landon shore last Thursday and they
discussed and had some comments but they
are going back to Landon Shore for more
discussion on October 4th and we're
hoping that both of those will go or at
least the Old Town sub area plan will go
back to City Council for action on
October 17th it's the same hour October
15th excuse me October 15th is it the
same for table permitted uses that's
what we're hoping and hoping the same
for that so just wanted to give you that
update and let you know where you're for
your stuff's going just a question yes
do you have any sense of what the
questions were that that precipitated a
lot regarding which topic either one of
them so Old Town I think more than the
discussion what took a while was that
one of the council members was new
and was not familiar with all town and
the other councilmember did not
typically sit on Landon Shore so he had
not heard the previous discussion that
took place the year before so they
really wanted to go through the entire
plan step by step by step and I I think
that that is what took a long time and
they had a few questions but nothing was
big there was nothing that was
controversial they just had some changes
in a couple of questions permitted uses
I didn't stay for right I think the main
issues they really liked that PBC added
some recommendations to the
administration's recommendations so they
were trying to understand what all the
use is worth not only that we were
trying to limit but that were already
that we're existing so we're finding
definitions of them all and I have a
feeling that if we can't find
definitions in the code for all of them
they may ask us to create them they were
also asking just some interesting ones
like you all had talked about like metal
fabricators glassblowing they were
intrigued with some of those ideas so it
was a good discussion we'll see how it
goes okay so back to the comprehensive
plan update and Joan took a lot of my
first slide but I wanted to remind you
that we do the comprehensive plan
amendments annually and every year we
collect proposed amendments and those
come from staff they come from the
Commission they come from council and
from the public we come by we compile
all of those proposed amendments into
what is called our docket our docket
then came to you all in January you all
reviewed it and recommended approval and
the City Council approved it in February
and so that's what we're working on so
because as John mentioned we can only do
this once a year if any other all of a
sudden you guys go oh tonight
we should amend this to that'll go on
next year's docket not this one so just
just a heads up and I think that's it
that's it for that okay so I'm going to
cover part of this and then Trish is
going to cover part of land use okay
I can see which once I'm going to do
that I'd be happy to do okay so I'm
going to talk numbers first they were
about seven updates in total for the
land resettlement proposed updates three
of them in Ward number two and they all
have to do with numbers population
housing and jobs and then we had
transferred development rights remove
and revise policies regarding the King
County Island because you might remember
that we annexed that last year and we
still had policies in the plan about it
and then add a policy regarding urban
schools that actually went into the
central Issaquah plan but we'll talk
about it tonight and then add a policy
regarding new housing without loss of
commercial square footage that went into
the economic vitality element it was
proposed as land use so we'll talk about
it tonight but I just want to like let
you know that's where it wound up this
is kind of small but we're gonna start
with table L 2 units toward the 2030 one
adopted state targets so our adopted
target is for 2030 1s 2006 to 2013 one
our proposed new housing unit number is
five thousand seven hundred and fifty
new units so last year we gained I've
got to get there he's like that's too
small for me to read last year we gained
that four hundred and forty five new
units we are total at 85% of reaching
our target so we're getting pretty close
these numbers are we submit numbers to
the Office of Financial Management the
office of Finance financial management
checks them and then we confirm them and
that's how we get our numbers we changed
the word constructed or completed to
permitted because we realized that ofn
the Office of Financial Management
actually counts the units that have been
issued building permits and not
necessarily units that have been
completed so we're in an effort to
remain consistent with what the state
has that's the way we have changed it
okay are there any questions about that
one you remind me what happens when we
hit our target and we're nowhere near
2031
nothing it's not it's just a target it's
really more what we can accommodate it's
not a ceiling for us it's more of a
floor and what can you accommodate if
you go over that's great but we'd like
to see you hit this number so do we have
measures in place to maybe slow roll
once we fit that number we are there
conversations about things we would do
to at least try to spread it out a
little bit once we hit our target well
art our goal is to get all of the growth
inside central Issaquah right where
there isn't any housing and we need the
housing there so if we get it there
that's great I would you know I I can't
speak for council but I would imagine if
some you know maybe something starting
to develop closer to the hillsides that
we have policies in place for that mount
to but if there things started to
develop elsewhere we do have a policy
actually now that I think of it if
somebody wanted to rezone and try and
EPS owned so that they could do more
housing we do have a policy that says
that we have already met our growth
targets and so as long as those have
been met we're not going to up zone at
all I I guess one thing that I was
thinking I was looking at these where
we're at right now in our targets and
obviously we all compare our housing
with jobs or Tartu hard core numbers
that we're looking at and I was curious
if maybe staff wanted to try to start
thinking about something down the road
where in the next few years when we
anticipate meeting a target in one place
and not in the other how we might want
to link them and say well if we are
adding more housing which you know we've
already hit this target and we don't
necessarily need it but we really do
need some jobs so how we might want to
think it outside the box to kind of
boost one number when we're pretty
steady on the other mmm-hmm I know it's
a vague request but it's kinda one of
those things where rather than getting
there and being like oh what do we do
maybe start mulling around things right
now as to what we can incentives we can
think oh I think one thing we're doing
with that I'm sorry Chris good job one
thing when you're in bed
no net loss yes that was real that's
right what's going cuz right now the
market is delivering in Issaquah is
delivering housing and not jobs and so
in the exact spirit of what to point out
we don't want to lose the jobs we have
and so then these new standards say no
net loss right and so potentially five
ten years from now or we find a
situation where Costco is expanding like
crazy and no one's building housing
maybe maybe they would read rigor things
and say oh no net loss of housing
something like that and I think that's I
was gonna say that same thing and I
think that one of the reasons to the
council asked and I think you all asked
for it too to see the jobs numbers in
there is to kind of do that comparison
annually to see where we are and have
checkpoints so that if it does come to
that then yes we could read about you
thinking how how can we boost this
rather than not only the loss but also
how do we yeah that's good another thing
that I thought it was that was when we
did the vertical mixed-use analysis one
of the one of the things that the
markets that he said is that to build
high quality you know one over five to a
two over five or five over to the market
didn't support that right now and so
there's a little bit of scratching more
like what do we want to have these
there's a really high bar in our core of
really high quality vertical misuse like
what downtown Kirkland and downtown
Redmond gets if the market doesn't bear
it and then I think a couple of us made
this point we were like well we know our
intent isn't to deliver vertical
mixed-use you know in 2020 the point is
to intend it deliver high-quality
vertical mixed-use in 2035 and if right
now a land prices a rental rental prices
don't merit that it's fine we're well
we're well on our pace to meeting our
targets and we've got really high
standards in central Iowa and if that
means it takes a little bit longer for
the development to emerge that's fine
because we're very much on track to
meeting the commitments we've made to
the county state state well set AJ yeah
okay sorry I'm late
that's okay anything else on this one
that's a good right that's a good
thought joy though and yeah
duly noted I think it's
really an easy question but looking at
our new units permitted 2018 445 then
down in the sub table those new units
permitted 903 so never 45 our units that
were permitted within 2018 completed
within 2018 that's four thousand nine
hundred and three units there's a four
in front of it the blue is a strikeout
yeah yeah
so it's four thousand nine hundred and
three units permitted okay so those are
how many units are in the pipe and the
445 is what's been constructed in 2018
or completed no they're all units that
have been permitted we're building
permits have been permitted in the
middle column right so it's four hundred
forty five s for 2018 correct well
that's how many units are permanent like
ins would would be in part of that for
this was three 2018 and Innis would had
not yet has not yet received its
building permit so that'll show up if
they get their building permit that
shows up next year okay what is the 445
then those were those were the number of
units that were permitted in 2018
between 2017 through 2018 okay and
what's the a prolonged that's it that's
it that's a 12-month number the 445 yes
yes okay and the 4903 is then what
that's the total number of units
permitted since 2006 middle it's a total
of oh okay it's guys it's a summation
yes yes are all of these numbers April
day April yes I say that and it's it's
in the footnote I did I did show up late
so you may very well say yeah it is
April April April forget I see it right
there footnote number one okay all right
are you ready for the next one okay this
one is new this year the City Council
asked for this this tracks our job
targets towards between twenty two
thousand six and twenty thirty one our
target is twenty thousand new jobs which
is
aggressive but that's what it is so it
shows just like the other one it shows
the new jobs per year or they were added
or in some cases lost and then the total
City jobs in the right hand column this
past year or since 2006 we've had seven
thousand and eighty nine new jobs which
gets us to just over thirty five percent
of our target so in a third of the time
that's that's kind of on track our
numbers come from the Employment
Security Department and you'll notice
that these are 2017 and the housing
numbers are 2018 not much we can do
about that
that's kind of how that's just the rate
at which they come in so any questions
about these and you probably guessed the
two where we lost jobs was the recession
how much would the full cost go build
out deliver ish I'm just curious and
it's in central squad yeah if they fully
built that what they're it's just over
19,000 Wow central Issaquah will
accommodate most of those jobs yes
that's 19 thousand new jobs or $19,000
new jobs we're gonna shouldn't I like
well wait let's see fourteen thousand
fourteen thousand five hundred and fifty
five and I'm not sure if that's in the
urban core if that's in central Issaquah
but most of those would be in the core
so I was off I apologize fourteen
thousand five hundred fifty-five so that
we're going to exceed the jobs numbers
for jobs target that fourteen thousand
is if we had almost thirteen thousand
left to go for target once house code
assume Costco builds out as Ajay is
saying here would be fourteen thousand
five hundred jobs that's it happens
before 2030 right but I mean we can't
guarantee that oh yeah okay good
okay the next one is our population in
household projections this one's never
been in there for a long time it's
required by the state we use the same
of' note OFM numbers for housing units
and then we are provided also by the
state with existing population numbers
and the households and then we are
required to project out through the
planning horizon of our comprehensive
plan which is through 2031 and so we use
a formula for most of that to project
out and then we use and we use the same
numbers at the state uses and then for
the villages we work with local
knowledge and what is oh sorry right
here we work with the villages and we
work with local knowledge and with what
we know is has been allowed or in tight
the entitlement there what's been built
out as part of the entitlement and what
is left so right now we have just over
37,000 people in Issaquah 37110 and
16,000 647 units okay any questions
about that one I was carrying some we're
gonna get updated census data or we're
going through all the housing now I
think it's been two years they do it
every ten years where we're ramping up
for it right now
it'll be 2020 yeah it really yeah it'll
be 2020 we the information won't come
out until about 2021 or 2022 but before
then the state isn't projected to give
any any other updates to our local
disbursement of demographics yes well
sort of well do lands will do buildable
lands and targets in 2018 twenty-nine
art morning you're supposed to be this
year 2019 no FM every year right yeah
they're just not validated with the with
the census right and when you guys get
that you'll be sending out to us is just
uh it gets posted it gets put out to the
world yes
all right these numbers
mutually-exclusive looking at the total
housing total employment so that's those
are the numbers if we everything got
built housing and then if everything I
build jobs right so the reality is you
would get somewhere in between the two
of them
can I interrupt with going back to page
21 where we had table L for our
remaining land supplying capacity and
used as an opportunity for an update on
the King County Island there was talk
about that piece of property being in
school I think there's talk about now
not being school the school district had
an option on it and they decided not to
they did some geotech borings and some
more analysis and I believe that they
chose not to use that site so yeah so
that's what I heard too what's now
projected with there I don't know what's
projected for that space but I know
they're looking at a site in Tallis now
who currently owns it we do yeah so I
think we're talking to staff about this
month to ago it's still zoned what I'm
curious about as if it's maybe any go
over to parks or I mean is it I haven't
heard it have discussions but that
doesn't mean that those higher up have
been discussing I don't know we can
certainly check when when yeah I guess
when I heard that I was a proponent of
not building a school there I didn't
think it was an ideal site so I was so
glad to hear that and I was like oh I
think this is a good opportunity to take
this space and see what what do we want
to do with it as a city in right so
right we can sure ask and bring it back
next time and seem like it might be a
nice thing to add to our greenery well I
wanted I thought it was a great school
side so I wouldn't hold on to it until
until the school district came around to
it for elementary schools 21 to 22 we'll
need them someday someday soon okay
thank you yeah you're welcome
so here's where I was gonna have Trish
take over but I will do my best
just to go to Ana tangents Trish walks
over what's the talus that they're
looking at is that the one that zone
four commercial is compact school and a
permitted use right now it's school is
and we're working with them to make it
as compact as possible German but it's
just they we're just in the early and
then before I forget I noticed we were
one of the pages we were referred to
urban schools yes I am this mm-hmm
are you guys ready for that discussion I
think it's number six we're on number
four we're getting there okay if we're
gonna cover it I had Donuts in my drive
over home okay okay well until we get to
there this is the transfer of
development rights you may recall that
we worked on some code last this past
year on transfer of development rights
based on the end of development
agreements for s qua highlands where
counsel put some limitations on we're in
the highlands transfer of development
rights can be used so we wanted to be
sure that the policy reflected the
limitation that council adopted in tho
so this is pretty specific we left a
little bit of it open that says the last
sentence the last part of the sentence
and other areas that can accommodate
additional density without negative
impacts to adjacent properties we added
that as sort of a catch-all in case
something amazing came up and we because
that if something amazing came up and we
only had specific locations we would
have to go through a comprehensive plan
amendment to provide for that so a
little bit of the door open in case
something amazing should come up that's
what the or other areas is for yes okay
and that's not because I saw that and
circled it and wrote loophole question
away another name for it yes we call it
an opportunity understandable okay but
if we so let's but let's say someone
comes so the developer wants to do a TDR
and it's not one of these locations
right say oh well this qualifies under
the
areas the city still the ability to say
no yeah I believe so well we'd have to
look into the TDR code and see if it
meets the other criteria and council
also has to approve TDRs but yeah true
so they can certainly say no okay
because I was still wondering because if
if the point of this was to narrow where
the TDRs land but it still is a loophole
that you could put TDRs anywhere I don't
know if this actually accomplishes
anything right not anywhere only places
that there you can't have negative
impacts to adjacent properties yeah
through the criteria I believe it would
be right so that so the controls is
still around the TDR stuff not yes we
still feel there's yes any other
questions on that one the King County
Island is if we skip age 23 and the
stuff around topographical character
that was highlighted if they're not it's
an order
she didn't go an order so which page are
you questioning know if they're not in
order I'm sure we'll get around to it
Lu policy a7 I was just going this is
and I'll get to that because I'm not
exactly sure what order the PowerPoint
is okay yeah if we'll get to it later
that's fine okay what can you call it
the page numbers then if they're not in
order
well the King County Island is number
seven its land use goal M which on my
trusty table of contents on the front of
your packet while you age five Landry
school M that's no that's different
[Applause]
now 32 you guys are good
yes I believe okay it might be the I
have page lu5 Lu 15 and Lu 16 are all
the King County references but this is
cleanup since we did annex the King
County Island we needed to take out all
the PA a language that still referred to
it as part of the county so this is
pretty much housekeeping we put in the
discussion what happened so we would all
remember what happened when we were
cleaning up the east cougar versus King
County Island and so that we all
remember that we still actually do have
a PAA left even though we're still
contesting that with King County but do
we still have to call it out cuz it's
technically yeah yeah yeah technically
it's still ours but and where is it
that's kind of not happy about it
it's west west below Montreux so it's
kind of above Montreux hairpin pass the
zoo that all of a sudden goes its way up
there and it doesn't have sewer the
roads are not really urban it we don't
believe it should have any kind of urban
development it has you know water it has
wells we just don't believe it's
acceptable for urban development up
there because it's we don't currently
deliver any city services to it we say
it again we don't deliver any city
services to that
no okay same can counting island again
urban schools is this the one you want
to talk about yeah hello
so myself last year you may have
remembered that when Jennifer was here
we did a code amendment for schools that
are not suburban and we called them
urban at first and there was a bit of a
ripple
and put folks in like the name urban
don't know why but they didn't and so we
started calling them compact schools
meaning they are not suburban they are
more sustainable they're on smaller Lots
there but you all were intrigued by the
idea and you said next time we do the
comp plan could you bring us policies
for urban because we believe that even
though there are compact schools we
believe that there's also another layer
of that kind of development which is
even more sustainable and efficient and
we would call that one urban and so we
have definitions that compact schools
would be all the schools that we would
like to see in Issaquah and those are
efficient they're sustainable there are
not as much land as the state would say
you need or could have for a school and
in that compact umbrella is a smaller
subset of urban schools and the urban
schools would be only and would be
located in central where everything is
supposed to be more dense more efficient
use of land housing really close to
everything so that you could walk
there'd be a lot more kids walking a lot
less single occupancy trips so we're
trying to differentiate an urban school
and a compact school and so we're using
this initial round of the comp plan
amendments to try to to try to separate
those and define them and set some
policies so that when you see standards
next year we hope for urban schools that
we will have already sort of laid the
groundwork for how are they different
that's kind of answering what my
question sounds like okay this is our
baby tiny little start and next year
we're going to see a nice juicy document
that says this is the policy this is
what they should look like and it dives
in a lot deeper
remember this year Udo then you already
did a code amendment for us for
standards for compact schools
you gave them F AR for the floor area
ratio you made 50% of the required part
can be structured parking for compact
schools you change the landscaping
requirements do you made them build
right out to the road I mean you did all
that but you had that niggling feeling
that you wanted to see some policies for
urban schools not for compact as much
because you felt it seemed like you felt
pretty comfortable with the compact
school piece I think what I remember to
that is you're correct
I remember to us having a discussion
with the community as well talking about
what do this look like looks like let's
paint a picture the same way that we've
been doing my old town and everything
let's do that for schools right because
the old way is not happening anymore
right we need a different way and it
sounded like we Fred it's a little bit
of miscommunication with the school
district on it look at crystal about how
we see this and let's let's break it
down let's and let's have a discussion
with the community about how do you see
that you want to interact with these
kinds of spaces and things like that
right so it sounds like my question goes
back to we have this nice start right
now does that mean that next year we're
gonna start to see this juicy policy
document that really dives into urban
schools and Issaquah well let me hang on
to that what we tried to do in the
policies is we tried to be real juicy
this time we're saying that that it they
have to offer safe ped bike routes
nearby transit routes they have to
minimize auto dependence they have to
make it easier for students teachers and
staff to walk biker bus they're supposed
to reduce automobile trips reduce
greenhouse gas I mean we we're thinking
we're trying to nail all the things that
would make them different than another
kind of school weather protection
waiting areas the next one has that they
have amenities for the neighborhood that
they're in like meeting spaces that you
can share the recreation opportunities
and then when you cite them
you use a smaller footprint green
building techniques and any kind of
sustainable practices that we haven't
even thought of yet
we just we sort of lumped him into
sustainable practices that you can use
for compact development so we were
trying to go through all of the school
topics and see how can we make them all
be more focused on being efficient and
sustainable and not power oriented not a
huge use of land and make them more
efficient is what we tried to do these I
liked all that do you want to jump in
before yeah so all these policies here
is this the first time we've seen them
or these all yes so yeah so a couple
questions one I think it would be
helpful to walk through what the for
each one of these have their different
than compact schools because some of
these it's it's hard to tell which of
these is just reiterating these would
all be for urban I know but I what I
want to see is like a I think I'm able
to see a side-by-side between the two to
understand the difference between right
well we don't have policies at this
moment for compact schools okay we have
code for for compact schools I think
that goes my second my second question
is looking at like urban policy a six
with like building heights and high-rise
spacing that really strikes me is like
Building Code specificity as opposed to
policy statements like like reduced the
amount of automobile trips that seems
like a fantastic comp plan statement but
some of these as you get a little bit
further on this really starts to read
like code so which part did you think
was code east six prioritize act a six a
six formally a three you see policy oh
I'm in central I'm sorry I'm in the
comfy aged Leu 22 or page 38 of print
oh I'm still I'm the first perk Solomon
now which page Oh after okay after pop
chart no they say find a baby I feel
like this is kind of something that
requires and so that's easy and doctor
so again I said we've been going through
all these subsets and neighborhood he
said he's talking about a year ago being
like yeah let's get some information
let's figure out how we're all feeling
about this and let's really fine-tune
this so that we don't have a situation
where our money keeps being spent on
schools that what's missing null well I
would love to see this be twenty pages I
would love to see this be like you know
I want but not in the complement this
isn't this isn't code though this is
only but to be able to base our our comp
plan off of something where we've had
public forums for people to talk about
where we've been able to open up in a
dialogue with the community bring in the
school district along the way to be like
hey this is what we're thinking
but what topic would be missing so what
one thing that I didn't see that was
addressed right now we're talking a lot
of like what's outside of the school
rather than what's in the school so for
instance sports fields no more multiple
sports fields we need to combine them
all into one area and working on it's
likely gonna be on a rooftop
there's no we're not gonna have space
for that we're gonna also have to think
about how we build schools as far as
like maybe grand atriums
that the school district loves to build
that can be classrooms we're having you
know it's tough to go walk into a brand
new school and be like this is beautiful
and that could have been five more
classrooms right there so the way that
we build the actual school the way it's
laid out in design isn't in this
document at all and that's okay as long
as we're like yes but we're working
towards really fine-tuning what we
expect to see and what are the
differences between schools in the core
versus our
our urban school design so something
like spaces almost like are to be used
for education and learning versus
something else that it would be focused
on maximizing space to just serve to
serve the community rather rather than
maybe just more grand architectural
design yeah so to me I see it you know
being something where because we're
gonna be stacking these schools in a way
that's very different to but and I think
you know growing vertically rather than
out and so that changes how you're
orienting also your space right and
they're gonna have to do that sort of
thing right and I if they I got this
feeling the last time that we had an
interaction with a school district that
they weren't quite on that same page so
the also besides creating this document
so that everyone is really clear on
everything in the community with the
city and with with a school district is
that we kind of build that together as
we go so rather than we reach a point
where the school district says hey we
have space we want to build and then we
start having kind of a collision I'm
hoping that we're kind of all coming
together and learning and creating
something and we're all on the same page
at the end of the day because right now
I don't know that we're able to be that
way I'm not saying that were not on the
same page I'm saying that I don't know
we've been had the opportunity to have
everybody come together and have a lot
of discussions in the community about
what do we want our schools to look like
and what is what is how does how is our
needs changed kind of a thing yeah yeah
my concern is more more processed but I
think that goes Joey I mean the term
urban schools could ever run all hot and
bothered in a lot we got a lot of public
engagement and I think we need that same
level of engagement on this text both
both from the public and I think
particularly from the school district I
mean you look at policy a to community
amenities in terms of meeting rooms in
schools like that that's if that's a big
Bugaboo sometimes that people are like
this building is vacant you know 280
days
80 days a year why isn't it something
that's open to the community right and a
lot of school districts are just not
open to that concept because if they run
schools right I don't run public
facilities right like we can't week
throw that as a policy and they're not
actually engaged with the school and get
to school
and we I believe we sent these when we
first drafted them to the school
district and didn't hear a lot back but
I'm sure we will once we go to we you
know swoosh it around and go to public
hearing we will send whatever version we
have then and but I just don't want this
particular one to then crowd out
everything else in the discussions of
the public hearing and I feel like it
needs its own time in the Sun because I
want like I went to school to get
district to come and share their
thoughts and object to things we can
have that conversation okay I also feel
like historically the school district
has been very unique in that they've
been able to kind of in a way with
different behavior that we would expect
from other developers or other partners
in our city and they're constantly
getting exceptions well this is what we
need and so they kind of flout whatever
whatever they have because they kind of
have this kind of you know get out of
building you know you know you know jail
free card well this is what we need and
so we'll just get an exemption and we
can't do that here
and so it's really important to somehow
engage the community in a way that we
help to bring the school district around
to this concept and maybe they are and
that's phenomenal but the last time that
we saw them they weren't they weren't in
any way that I felt confident that we
were like moving forward together which
is really what we need to be successful
so I love this start I love a lot of
these concepts and I guess I just want
more okay kind of a central Issaquah
plan we need his whole plan yeah well
they have a schools plan
the school district what do you what
were unit right well it's not a it's its
capacity its kids its square footage
it's not what do they look like as much
as how do we pay for it where does the
bond go how many what's the capacity how
do we build out in six years and that's
second
that third job right our job is to say
this is how we way this is how we want
the buildings to interact with the space
around them we just went through all
this with design standards and we were
so excited to finally be like yeah this
is exactly what our city needs we need
that equivalent with education you know
it's not just how it looks it's how it
actually functions and interacts in our
community right right and it's my
understanding and when they come to
whatever meeting we want to specifically
invite them to talk about it I would
rather it be when Keith's back because
he has a better relationship you know
with with how they've moved forward but
that the bond that they did back in 16
hours 16 was based on not urban schools
it was based on the building plans that
they have had in the past and so urban
schools I have a higher construction
cost because you're going this way
instead of this way and so I think
they've committed to build urban compact
slash schools in the next round of
schools not the one that they've gotten
the bond money for but I think we're
trying to still edge them closer to a
compact school footprint even though we
know that the bond amount isn't based on
that knowing that they probably can't
call a hundred percent to an urban model
with this round of schools that they're
building just because they didn't have
that in their RFQ when they went out to
bond but I think that would be a good
discussion to have with them is are they
committed to go you know as far as they
could go with the money that they have
they're not planning on building the
school in the central Issaquah area well
they don't have any land no they don't
so yeah it was time to actually put a
policy together for schools policy you
know central is across we do still have
the bulk of that bond money left they I
think they have all of it because they
haven't bought any sites yet so in
theory and again this isn't my purview
so stop me if I'm correct they could
reverse course and be build something
that is more similar to a compact school
because even though they may be
delivering less they may be also
delivering more in that it's more in
line with what our community needs and
purchasing a piece of land that may be
considered more expensive but with still
having this glut
funds which i think has an expiration
right and i am again that's not my peru
either but from what yes from our
discussions they didn't allocate enough
money in the when they went out for the
bond to build vertical schools they they
went that shouldn't stop us from setting
better policy oh absolutely it doesn't
stop us but it stops them err it limits
them a little bit from this round of
schools to be built to have them all the
way that we would the community what
these are two different conversations
are that that's their issue this is
we're talking about the yeah we said we
said this day means everyone the school
this just has to figure out how to meet
their meet meet meet their needs within
those constraints just like as Joyce
said just like any any of our other
public partners that's right for them
right I think that would be generally
true right but our other partners don't
worry about children and their education
so I'm a little hesitant with this
conversation that dictating to the
schools that they need to do this this
and this what if they their their goal
is to get six sixth grade classes in
that building and because you have an
open atrium and this and that and a
compact school they're not going to be
able to do that
so I think we have to be very careful
about theme but that's it for me that's
the reason we need to have them at the
tables right so we can have the classes
but I just want reiterate the necessity
of being careful of going into a
conversation with saying you have to
have this this and this when the school
knows better hopefully what the children
need and how they can be taught that's
all well packed schools are thriving all
around this nation and I'm sure they are
and I think it's just important that we
they that we create something that works
for the community rather than falling
back on an old model even if there is
this concept of well this is harder
let's just keep doing what we know no I
think you know I I don't think we have a
choice but to go into compact schools I
just want to be careful about how much
we tell the schools that they have to do
in order to get what they actually need
I think we just have to be careful on
that at a high level the way I read it
is is this commission we can set the
policy around what what the outside
looks like how it interacts with the
community and the school district comes
into what happens inside our house
design inside the building right so it
sounds like we're creeping into the
inside of the school where maybe
historically we're we're set to see how
it like as the I think the a lot of
these call out great bullet points and
ideas for how the community interacts
with the school as a building but it
doesn't creep inside the walls to say
what they need you know I read a note
right yeah and that's true everything we
whenever write these policies even when
dealing with you know for-profit
developers we don't want to be too
prescriptive in Kremp development
because we want good developments that's
true for all these things and sometimes
we set standards from the outside which
we think is awesome but you end up
looking at the school district and well
I need that extra three feet because we
need these twelve other classrooms so I
mean you just can't dictate to the
extent that we think we can you know
it's not just the community it's the
kids and what how well they can be
educated and what they need in that in
that school so just a quick question
just about the process because we're
just getting introduced to all these
tonight and there will be a public
hearing it sounds like right now that's
the the one and only opportunity for
schools to come and talk and you know
interact with us on the issue
it sounds like others are hoping that
there might be more maybe a just an
informational session where they would
come but maybe they wouldn't come unless
it was a public hearing right I could
set up something because we have three
different meetings that we're talking
about comp plan amendments and if we
could agree on one that where most of
you all would be there that we could
invite the school specifically to talk
about that set of policies before the
public hearing so that if you work if
you work towards some kind of middle
ground that we have time to draft that
for the public hearing if that would be
a way back I think that's to have
already incorporated that the school the
school board's feedback before we okay
but go to the public so when we get to
next steps I'll have you guys look at
the dates that are listed there and see
which ones do you think I mean I know
you'll be at all of the meetings but
which one would be the best one to
invite and then see if the school
district can come and be with us at the
table and it will be an open meeting yes
oh yes it would just be we would just
have that on the agenda as talking about
the urban school policy does that work
yeah and just so you know when Ajay had
asked about why is some of the some of
them prescriptive the main the
overriding policy is urban community as
create a compact attractive mixed use
urban community that prioritizes
pedestrian safety comfort and enhances
the quality of life and so that's why we
talk about building heights and all
those other things in there it's not
just the schools that we talk about in
that it's it's the whole community being
compact and pedestrian oriented what
want one last point so you talked about
this the urban schools is a concept that
sits within the compact schools concept
we only have we only really have
language around urban schools would it
be would it be useful to have a
paragraph or section header that then
lays out what our comp plan vision is
for compact schools and then even though
there's a lot more text on the urban
side that's a subset of it right and we
would like that to go into the big comp
plan because this again it's just
central plan but we're not sure if we
can get that teed up in the next few
weeks because we're still trying to
figure out you know it's real
differentiation that if you're standing
in the lobby it's very small as it would
be of a compact school or a very small
lobby of an urban school how would you
really know that you know what makes
them different so that's what we're
trying to figure out is how do you make
them different but I think we I think we
need to have thought that through before
I can lay out urban standards because we
need to understand what the difference
well right right right that's what I'm
saying is we threw the first set down
and now when we
see it we go well if that's a band then
how do you back up a little to do the
compact ones because we already have
compact code yeah as long as we get
there right these are compact schools
and then these are these are urban right
okay right excellent discussion I knew
you guys would love those this was an
exciting one that you came up with this
was a head scratcher it you thought it
we all thought it would be in land you
so it ended up in economic vitality
because we thought it had a lot more to
do with economics than it did with land
use and this was the one you talked
about briefly that to make sure that
when we do non-residential to make sure
that we don't lose the jobs during the
sepoys redevelopment this applies only
to centralized Oakland correct do we
define job opportunities
I would guess not I would bet not I
think we're trying to we didn't want it
to be because again this isn't in code
yet it's just the idea that when you're
looking at redevelopment if you keep
redeveloping but I thought it was in
code when atlas came in and all the
little those strip mall with the garlic
restaurant went away you people were
getting nervous that are we gonna
replace all of our retail and commercial
with housing should there be some kind
of a check that if you come in and
you're going to redevelop on a
commercial site you have to have some
percentage of commercial that you've
displaced and so we're trying to figure
out how to write that and this is this
is how we try to write the policy so the
policy is written but if the funding
code is it well remember you can't
really you're not supposed to write code
without some policy direction that that
links it and so we didn't have anything
like that before because we were so
happy to have housing i'm gilman that we
didn't think it was a risk but if that
keeps calling gilman is going to be a
residential street pretty soon so we
should think about capping it so this is
what we started with but by adopting the
socialist core standards
i thought that made it in for code
enforceable
well there's no code standard in the
standards that that says that Atlas
should have put in I'm not I'm looking
forward to the next development and we
adopt this plan this is the policy the
next step would be the code how the code
would be so we so we've lifted the
moratorium so right now someone could
come in and redevelop one of the strip
malls and not and violate this policy
yes if they filed if they could yes they
could just come in and just do
residential so oh that's true
bonus points for senior planners over
here when you all did the vision which
of course I have forgotten because it
was just last week there are those
developer developer obligations that you
put in there and so those would and
they're they again that's a real general
statement
this is enforceable via the developer
obligations for a few of the
neighborhoods I don't think it's for all
of them though I think it's just it's
probably they were going to say
Pickering Gilman and one lick might be
maybe we couldn't look at that though
okay that's what I wanted to confirm
that this was they said this is
currently enforceable in the core unit
if it's some certain person right I
think it's loosely I think that's one of
if Lindsey was here at she be beating
that drum right like it's in the policy
statement but if it's not enforceable I
know this comment may just go into the
wind but I'd love to have this policy be
extended into our our other situations
and thinking particularly about
development agreements that we have with
developers and I'm also thinking
particularly about the rally development
that's adjacent to mall Street and
Gilman
and well we don't know when or where
that's going to look like we have a lot
of commercial there that's for Ferrari
yeah so we really do know what its gonna
look like the development agreement has
standards and pictures and requirements
and allotments for retail commercial
housing we would be able to apply no net
loss to that well no they already have
their and tight I mean we know it's like
a package we already agreed on with them
and the City Council on exactly how much
development they got how much has to be
retail commercial housing there would
cancel would you so I grant that we
can't change it I'm curious would you
say that we would have no net loss yes
we didn't have some housing thrown in
there where there's no housing now we'll
be losing any commercial correct we
would not be losing any commercial
because I don't remember how much it is
entitlement but it's a it's a big number
yeah it's a big number so that's awesome
for the rally is there any other
development agreements but you would say
where this doesn't hold it's putting
this policy appoints is there anybody
who would be like out of compliance no
cuz Lakeside's all residential and
that's sealed that's and Costco is just
the opposite Costco is all commercial
with no residential so they wouldn't be
losing commercial job opportunities in
the Costco development agreement either
good any other comments on this one
that's a good one
whoops whoops
oh well goodness and what pages sent on
page 23 of your packet and that's the as
I called Dominique's
page numbers at the very very bottom 23
of 63 yeah I should have remembered that
when I went over that today there were a
lot of items in this packet this time
these are part of the land-use element
in the entire comp plan not just in
central and the first one a six is
everybody there prioritize acquisition
of forested hillsides land that enhances
connections to public land and supports
community value of forested hillsides
that one was added to the docket I
believe by Landon Shore and that's how
we wrote it are there questions on on
that one
what are we prioritize it over in my
mind when we wrote it it was when we're
buying land that if it if there happens
to be a forested hillsides for sale
versus another piece of land for sale
that we would we would buy the forested
hillsides for the public versus perhaps
something else this of course doesn't
bind you bind your hands if you're the
council because again there's no code
connected to this that says thou shalt
only buy the forested hillsides if there
are two properties for sale but it's
sort of sense sets that intention that
that the community would like us to
prioritize hillside land to buy for the
public so this is a policy that may not
turn into a code if it turned into a
code it would be I'd be a tricky one
because it's about I mean its financial
so we would have to work with however we
do budgeting and that kind of thing to
see how we would craft that but it
definitely sends a message it sends an
aspirational goal that if it's available
that we would try
to buy it if if we were if we were in
the market to buy some land we wouldn't
implement this with owed we'd implement
this with budget well and that would be
right that was it that would be a way to
implement it to make it happen last
month there was a parcel over here off
the behind the Sunset Trail okay I was
actually going through development
prospect where it would actually I think
40 40 condominium cottage units behind
there's a the trailhead that's right
back here the trailer right there would
be right next to that mm-hmm I can
actually share that the personal writer
no no I think I know where you are that
would actually go all the way and take
half the trailhead Sun Sun trailhead
right light parcel was actually for sale
it was you know it went up for a sale in
the city said we're not interested in
that
well why wouldn't we be interested in
buying that because that's actually well
we didn't have a policy yet because this
is just draft and I don't know the
history of that I know often things come
up for sale and often the property
owners ask us first would you like to
buy this for XY and Z and sometimes were
able to and sometimes we're not able to
so I'm I wasn't in the room when we
chose not to do that one I thought we
I thought we owned or somebody owned the
part of the trailhead there though yeah
it is actually owned by a private
individual the trailhead those trail
heads there's like 30 40 feet from
sunset to where this new property
boundary is which would actually be
almost parallel to the trail itself that
goes up to that okay
and that whole space is actually being
looked at now for cottages okay this
might be a good time to kind
look at this get this nailed down and
maybe look at that parcel because
looking twenty years out that's a major
trailhead for a lot of people right well
I don't think we would have lost the
trail head because I think that's ours
or King County where the sign in the
parking is located Jason right literally
right parallel to that trail right is
that parcel right and I don't know and
again I don't know why we didn't we
didn't go after it but but this is I
think this is why this one came up
bye-bye I think you all liked it I think
it came from land and shore but then you
all agreed that it should be on the
docket so that's how we that's how we
wrote it I personally like it in regards
to the public comment we got about the
word prioritize I didn't read the
document at all as being like this was
now the holy grail of our work and now
you know traffic and everything else
didn't matter I didn't read it like that
at all to me it's very clear when you
see what section were in what we're
talking about so I like the word
prioritize and I think it fits right in
line with what we feel so I wouldn't
change it okay good good to know any
other comments on that one that's the
short one of the two this is have any
impact on the I think it's the Bergsma
development the one that that's actually
there moving forward on those things but
this I think is another reaction to what
happened last year that they that
project is vested so this won't this
won't have any impact on it um I would
no vested is a tricky word I don't think
invest it's not the right word yeah I
don't I think I think we're still
working with the part I think we're
keeping all the options open that we can
as a city but yeah I don't think I don't
think the final chapter has been written
on that yet
and to be clear this policies about how
the city spends our money right on
buying land not necessarily on
enforcement I guess I was looking at a
seven always more whether or not that
would impact or what that development
can't can and can't do replica right
this isn't a the next one is a reaction
to hillsides and sloped sites how
they're developed
this part of this was solved in the
architectural design manual that you all
worked on for central as part of the
moratorium they wanted some of the
language actually put in policy form
that would help inform how that's how
that's implemented and so that's why and
we the actual quote at the bottom won't
be in there it's just helping you all in
helping us remember where we got the
language but that would be taken out
before it was adopted there any
questions on that the hillsides part
and the other ones that we missed any
other questions before we move to parks
doctor I give you Emily today is her
four-week anniversary at the city hmm we
are happy oh good evening commissioners
my name is Emily our touch-a and a
Senior Planner here at the city of
Sammamish and yes it's my for this
excuse me
that was a faux pas excuse me four-week
anniversary from a neighboring
jurisdiction not to be named so thank
you for bearing with me on that I am
here today to introduce to you some
changes to the parks element it has a
longer name the parks and recreation and
open space was an open space plan but
for black of brevity I just put the
parks element and as you recall the
parks department came to present some of
the work they were putting together that
recently was adopted in the 2018 park
strategic plan if you haven't seen that
it's available online city council
recently adopted this document just in
July of this year and the parks
department came to you to kind of
introduce the work they were doing in
June you had a public hearing on June
14th so I'm here today to just go over
and acknowledge the changes that have
been embedded or proposed to be embedded
into the parks element from the
strategic plan and to go over a few
quick adjustments or amendments that
went on to the non policy non goal
related parts of the element so as you
can see in your packets I've organized
the changes that occurred from the work
that was done on the strategic plan and
how they were embedded into the goals
and policies of the city's comprehensive
plan in the parks element I'm not going
to go through each one of those but
did anybody have any questions at all as
you may have looked at the back pack of
material in advance are we gonna drop in
I noticed there was this this picture is
going away yes it already exists in the
comp plan
so it was duplicated yeah I did on my
next slide I do have a brief discussion
of other items that have been deleted or
from the existing parks element that's
one of them I also include on this list
here the state requirement just an
update that the parks element as you may
not have known is not a required element
but the cities had one for a very long
time and parks are very important and
though it's not required I just made the
adjustment in here the proposed
adjustment just to acknowledge that we
have a voluntary element that we're very
proud of a much of the other changes we
go back to refer back to work that's
already been done in the strategic plan
including the inventory summary and
future Park and Rec needs all of that is
very detailed in the strategic plan and
so in an attempt to try to eliminate you
know mimicking that was going on in the
more detailed plan we proposed to
actually eliminate that discussion is
there any questions about that
implementation what was appendix B could
you say that P 19 if people F regarding
implementation the discussion it says
the city has established a list of
implementation strategies appendix B oh
yeah we're working on that next time
that's a whole separate part where we
took all the implementation pieces out
of all the elements and put them in one
spot and then this year we're supposed
to go through those and try to
prioritize them yeah excellent question
so there is a reference to parks in that
implementation it's almost its own
element of the comprehensive plan
so that's still part of our work program
and this might be similar question so
like the inventory summary that got
taken out is that now is just showing up
someplace else
yeah as I referred to just a few minutes
ago in the park strategic plan they've
got a very nice comprehensive inventory
listed of and park classification as
well so it really belongs to be it
belongs in that strategic plan make
sense mm-hmm and then similarly the
level of service all that language
around our level of service is adequate
does that all address yeah we
abbreviated it quite a bit it is also in
the strategic plan and parks we'll be
coming back as I've noted on the screen
next year you've asked them to come back
again for another opportunity to look at
the parks element and I'm sure they're
going to be talking about LS as well I
mean they've got some ideas of how they
might want to redress that in the future
park strategic plan
well sounds like we'll have more
information in the next meeting Bretton
that would just be on the implementation
pieces yeah there's no more
we haven't scheduled any more
discussions for the parks element but
there'll be another opportunity in 2019
for the parks department to come back
and address the goals and policies again
with you as we've understood from a
previous meeting that you've had some
ideas about how you might want to
reorganize them or address them
differently and I think that'd be a
great opportunity as they plan to update
the strategic plan annually it's a great
opportunity to get them in the right
frame of mind for you know goals and
policies that you'd like to see us bring
back and put into the parks element and
actually it's theirs cycle of six years
further for updating they're not doing
it annually but it's an odd piece that
you all requested to do the goals and
policies again so they agreed to do
those next year but the whole plan
wouldn't thank you yeah so of course six
years yeah right Trish thank you so much
for clarifying that
because I can see that yeah it's not but
but they will be back next year not ever
a year after that right and then the
development impact fees got stricken and
put somewhere else
right right though yeah actually the
impact fees we're working on updating
those now we hope to have them done
early while mid next year because we
were waiting for them to finish the
strategic plan and the list of projects
and now we're waiting for them to put
price tags on the list of projects
because that's what goes into the impact
fee calculations is how much money will
it take for us to build those when
everybody comes to live here and that's
what gets rolled into the impact fee
isn't that usually cited here what that
calculation is in this document don't we
usually have the impact but no we do it
in a rate study and then we we put the
outcome of the rate study in the plan
and that's our that's what we call the
level of service okay so we will will we
have that updated number for this year
know that it won't be done until next
year
okay good question though
any more questions on the parks element
proposed amendments if not I'm going to
turn it back over to Trish for some
wrap-up on next steps next steps next in
two weeks not next week two weeks we're
gonna do the transportation element
amendments there's only a few very few
and Appendix B that it sounds like you
were all excited about those will be
coming back and if that's a night that
you're all gonna be here we could invite
the schools or we could invite the
schools October 11th you also have
another public hearing that night for a
new code amendment that you're gonna
love I think but we could also invite
the schools that night and have a really
great conversation about urban schools
or well those are the two that would be
coming before the 25th which was when we
hope to have a public hearing if you're
not ready on the 25th we could bump it
to November it wouldn't bother me to
bump everything to November the council
is busy with budget and all sorts of
things so I I think we would be fine if
you all needed more time because heaven
knows there's been so many other
projects going on with you all this year
that to start the comp plan in September
hasn't happened in many many years
usually we're well into it by September
and we've just all been very busy I
think for the school I just want to make
sure they have time to digest and give
us good feedback so if they could do
that in two weeks great but I also I
also want to respectful at the time for
the the staff probably needs to review
it it would be great if the board had an
opportunity to provide their thoughts to
staff before the okay the district staff
came here so I mean I think if they can
do that and we can have a good
conversation the twenty-seventh great
but I mean I'm sure that everyone's
over there with the start of the school
year there were a lot of things going on
so I wouldn't expect the two-week
turnaround so maybe October the 11:30
yeah I mean I love the idea of them
coming when we have when we're also
inviting the public and so I would ask
the chair to maybe create a space that
we could allow the public to comment on
it as well and just use it as an
opportunity to see as kind of a you know
engage and see what people are thinking
I couldn't hurt but again I would defer
to the chair for that agenda are you all
would you all mostly be here on October
11th if we if we sort of thumbnail that
one as the first the first try yep is
that really enough time for you it's
only two weeks
October 11th that would be four weeks it
depends what Keith does it would just be
an open meeting like today is and again
if they're not available we can bump it
into October and then bump the public
hearing until November that's okay too
how do we instruct the school district
to review it based on what we talked
about tonight we just give them the set
of policies right right some of the
discussion that I was talking about lack
of policy so instead of you know
surprising them when they get here
I don't know how what do we think I can
send them give them kind of a heads up
of what right missing her this summary
would basically staff would basically
communicate that we're looking to create
policy for both urban and compact
schools and we'd like to create
something that works for both and
distinguishes both would being unique
and kind of exciting out those things
that we're hoping to figure out right
and and I could send them the link of
them of the video for tonight too so
they could actually see how you
discussed it but it wouldn't surprise me
if we tried to meet with them
for we met with them here just for to
keep the surprises at a minimum to just
kind of chat through stuff make some
more constructive will get through
absolutely absolutely and that's what we
want we don't want to surprise anybody
right start from basic scratch and come
together with some ideas then right tell
the school district or or anyone what
this is going to do at this point in
time I think when staffs put together so
far is you great starting point yeah I
do to agree I just think we need that
element of collaboration with the
community school district with the city
so that we create a policy that works
for what we want and can actually be
executed rather than just creating a
policy to the district and says well
that's a nice thought you know and also
that we address the needs of what
everyone is saying that they're that
they're wanting for creating school
okay other thoughts other ideas okay
so we'll do we'll redo the schedule
depending on when we can work with the
school district and when everybody's the
planets all aligned for all of us
and the public hearing might be in
November if we need to adjust we sent
out I think yes we did we sent out a
tentative not a tentative we sent out an
alternate meeting so we don't have to be
here on Thanksgiving although I know you
would want to be all together on
Thanksgiving we haven't ever done that
so we try to snag the meeting ahead the
Thursday ahead of Thanksgiving to all be
thankful for each other and to have a
PPC meeting and so I think we've already
snagged the date and done an RSVP to you
all because we figure you're probably
busy that next week so if we had to bump
the public hearing or any of the
meetings we do have to still have two
meetings in November that we can work
from I'd recommend not putting the
school district on that 11:15 slot just
because we're already in the pickering
room it's right right and that's kind of
an odd right right but I'm just saying
we still have two meetings in November
even though you might have thought that
we didn't any other thoughts on on that
whole piece okay anything else you would
like us to know about transportation or
implementation any update on the
transportation staff and/or the
Transportation Commission the staff is
coming the staff is coming on the same
Monday but I haven't heard what's going
on with the committee if they're right
they were waiting to get staff on board
before they started hiring and looking
for the committee the tab the
transportation Advisory Board is what
was an award it's a board transportation
Advisory Board and I think bylaws have
been adopted by council but they were
waiting to go out and interview people
until the staff had come on board yeah
okay
anything else what's the status we had a
meeting with the small cell wireless
communication what is the status has
anybody come in and requested permits
and I think yes however we just met
there's some sort of a moratorium that
we're trying to figure out Keith
mentioned at Keith that's usually
sitting here he mentioned it and we're
trying to sort out what it means is it
is it coming from and and all I heard
was that that all the cities are trying
to figure out what the moratorium is
does it usurp all the work that we did
or does it and that was on Tuesday and I
haven't heard an update on that but I
can find out
just from the different but but yes
someone had come in to with permits for
that but I think everything is kind of
stopped who did the moratorium the
County well that's what they're we're
trying to figure out it was one of those
you know we got an email from the law
firm we got an email from the state word
and it was one of those where you try
and figure out what everybody's saying
because everybody isn't really saying
the same thing so we were all trying to
sort it out in Keith's like oh I know
about it and then he's not here so this
was one of those if he was here he would
be able to go Joan I got all the answers
but yeah he took the answers with him
but he'll be back and I will find out we
had that long discussion it was
basically decided today we come back to
us in a year right now hopefully that's
on the schedule some time to actually do
that after the moratorium right over and
we know right but that's a good thing to
put on for next year is to make sure we
revisit small-cell
and I think it was to revisit after
someone had installed right for us to go
in okay because it was getting ready to
go into the permitting stage and we
wanted to know how it would look and act
right before we had 200 other one right
and we I can ask Lucy because she might
have heard more about it since Tuesday
okay any other good questions you guys
are on fire tonight this is exciting
see AJ what you miss when you're not
here no dang it it is very sad I could
add it back okay well that's all I have
I will leave you guys that's no other
updates for the good of the order or
anything I don't have anything that you
guys want to talk about Oh incoming
well I actually I had this speech
prepared that I was going to say you
know we would have a public comment
after we had discussed it but looking
out there I don't think I see too many
heads that are would be willing to come
up and say anything so with that I'm
gonna close that painting at 7:50 all
right well done
you