good evening and welcome to the October
25th meeting in the planning policy
commission tonight we're going to have a
discussion on the central area plan
regarding urban and compact schools and
we have two representatives from the
school district to help us make sure
that we get we can't construct schools
that are beneficial both to the city and
to the school district but first we have
a set of minutes that we have to approve
so would somebody like to make a motion
for the minutes of September 13th I
would like to move that we approve the
minutes of September 13th do I have a
second a second any discussion all those
in favor say aye aye
and I'd like to set a motion to accept
the minutes from September 27th second
others in favor say aye aye motion
carries minutes for October the 11th and
I'd like to make a motion for the
minutes of October 11th a second any
discussion all those in favor say aye
aye motion carries we're just rolling
you see how well that was orchestrated
so Trish I assume that you're going to
lead us in this discussion well first I
thought I would just go through
super-deluxe fast what's in your packet
which is the policies that you've
already seen for urban schools and the
definitions for urban and compact
schools and then you all had asked last
time to have policies also for compact
schools so those are in your packet and
you also ask that we invite the school
district and school board folks to come
and talk with us about this and engage
in a good conversation so we better
understand what what both groups are
hoping to get and so they are here as
well so so far everything is coming
together really well
the background on this you might have
forgotten why we did compact schools
last year in 2017 part of it was the
King County policies that required
cities and school districts to work
together to find school sites to make
schools more efficient to use the land
better and also the school district
requested that we review our code to
make it easier for them to be better
stewards of the land use it more
efficiently because they were thinking
of putting up a school up on the hilltop
up in the highlands and it was a very
small parcel and so they had requested
that we look at the code and the outcome
of all that between King County and the
district is that we amended the code for
compact schools and that happened at the
end of September last year so this year
here we are again because you all had
asked when we were going through the
compact schools discussion it worried
you a little bit that there was no
policy safety net if you will or no
policy direction about compact schools
or urban schools and so you asked us if
we would review that this year which is
sort of backwards from how we usually do
things but since the school had asked
for the code amendment and King County
had asked last year for it we did that
first but now we're coming back to sort
of fill in the policies and talk about
those a little bit so that's what we're
continuing to talk about tonight and the
new definitions that you already had
seen at the last meeting where we talked
about this the urban schools and compact
schools I think they were tweaked just a
little bit from the last time you saw
them and these are in your packet in
fact and our Steve do you guys need
packets information okay because we have
spares if you need a mice everything
that's fair I guess I would take it oh
sure very scribbled on
[Music]
and so these were hoping that these
definitions that actually go into the
code the land use code in the central
office mr. quest standards and the
policies that you already reviewed last
time we're again about urban schools and
these are in your packet that talks
about how to cite them how their smaller
footprint green building techniques all
those kinds of things and then the new
ones that you haven't reviewed yet are
the ones that you had asked for these
were just some simple amendments to
exist the existing goal and the existing
policy about Smart Growth and being a
regional leader we thought these seem to
already talk a lot about what we're
talking about with compact and more
efficient but it wasn't specific to to
educational facilities or institutional
tsoi's we put those in to amend those
two pieces and then these were the new
policies there's several for urban urban
schools and and we threw compacting
there to since they're the it's the
overriding compact are all the schools
in the city and urban are those more
dense that are just in central Issaquah
just in the smaller area and these talk
about being designed as bus priority
instead of car priority and I would
imagine that compact schools would be
able to do that to some extent but we
would want herb in schools to do that to
a greater extent we still need to talk
about what that means but you know
that's what we're we're trying to get to
that if there's more ability for the
kids to walk and bike and and have
separate ways so that the the biking
child does not run over the blocking
children sidewalks you know things like
that so so those are two new ones and
then here's there's also three new ones
as well that talk about smaller
footprints supporting infrastructure for
the smaller school using the least
amount of land we even threw in a that
perhaps the sites should be less than
five
usable acres so that you're starting
with a smaller footprint so that would
that's a policy to consider and then to
sort of round out our discussion we
wanted to put the this is the existing
code for compact schools that you
adopted last year with with sixty five
foot height a minimum floor area of 0.75
which we talked about when we were
talking about municipal facilities that
so far not many of our facilities have
that but then we've it's only been
required on the books for you know a
year so that that's ambitious which is
good to be ambitious and so in putting
these up here I thought this would be a
good place to start engaging with the
school district on how are they doing
with their thinking about compact
schools and I know when they were
designing when they designed the one on
hilltop it was very compact it was about
six acres and it had a really great
design it's too bad that they weren't
able to move forward with that
but just to try to get the conversation
started
I threw some questions in that might be
a place for us to start or if you all
want to start somewhere else but to me
that the starting spot was building
height if compacts are our 65 would
urban would you ever imagine making an
urban school taller than 65 feet or as
is height not not in the wheelhouse of
how things would be more more efficient
for you and then setbacks would you ever
have an urban school that has zero on
any of the size or do you always need
some sort of a buffer from whatever the
adjacent use is the minimum last size we
talked about maybe five acres or less
sharing recreation facilities sharing
parking you know with a nighttime use is
there any is that something that you
could see in the future you know when
the time comes that you can build
schools in central or there other other
ways of being more efficient being more
compact and urban
just throwing those out there and I'm
gonna go sit down so that you all
kentukcy amongst yourselves and but I
thought these were just some thoughts to
start from or you may have other places
that you want to start if there's any
slide you would rather me have on the
screen I know that there's I wouldn't
say confusion but some concern between
the two types of schools and I kind of
like to start with what you as a school
district how do you take them apart how
how do you I know that again they're
lumped together and are there things
that really drive them apart and make
them different with different
requirements and we look at the
definition difference between them and
how does that make sense to you guys
though that's where I was getting one so
they are different so I know that if as
read is it on yep it's on okay yeah I
think definition is a good place to
start there are two definitions one for
urban and one for compact schools and
there's a really key differentiation
there and that is that urban schools are
a type of compact school located only in
central Issaquah you talk about her just
a little I can do that so there's one
real key difference between the
definition of urban and compact school
and that is that an urban school urban
schools are a type of compact school
located only in central Issaquah so
basically if it's in central Issaquah
within the core area plan it's an urban
school it fits into that category if
it's outside of that area it's a compact
school and the definitions are different
and the needs of the facilities the
requirements of the facilities are going
to be different in those two different
distinct areas
and so part of the concern was that
while the definition defines two
separate things some of the other
policies tend to lump them together and
that becomes a difficult issue part of
the is that next year we hope to bring
back urban school regulations and so
this could be like this the starting
point that if a compact school outside
of central can be 65 feet how tall could
an urban school be can it be a hundred
feet you know can it be two more stories
or it can it be so this is sort of it
was a good that you started out with
that question because we're trying to
figure that out to regulation wise it
doesn't change how how much how much
more dense should the regulations be in
the urban area in central versus outside
the city so with that I think you have
to look to the future and say how many
houses are you going to be building in
central in in the core and how many
children does that equate to and will
four stories work but without the
ability to put extra outside buildings
in it or do we need at some point in
time to go up higher to meet the needs
of all these kids right well for the
urban core alone we're supposed to have
over 2,000 housing units in there and so
how many region goals at or Dory's does
that well that that becomes a really
interesting question because we don't
have in this city history show or to
indicate how many students would be
generated in that type of development if
we look at Redmond where there is a lot
of recent or five-story residential over
commercial and/or retail space it's a
very low generation rate I could pull
out the numbers but in Redmond in the
Lake Washington School District there's
like 22 or 300 well I should probably
just get them
it's well over 2,000 multifamily units
and there's like 250 kids great full you
know the whole not k12 grade span North
Shore has a fairly high number of recent
multifamily units and a very very low
student generation rate so right now
it's really hard to predict and within
those the total number of units you
don't know how the mix of one two three
four or five bedroom units will be and
well it's kind of hard to predict I
would say that it's not multiple schools
and I think a district will be
challenged to provide for the full grade
spans and we'll have to get creative in
how the full student k12 population is
handled in in the urban area so part of
our district thinking has been that
there will be a large number of units
we're not sure what the generation rates
would be but there will be more kids in
the urban core area and that the
existing district administration site is
a site that we are looking to try and
reserve for the future so that when
those kids start to arrive there's some
land available to be able to accommodate
those those students and the space that
they'll need so that's moved us in our
current building program to look at
sites for the two new elementary schools
in middle school and the high school to
other sites and all of those other sites
are outside of the the core area well
they're all sites that would fit within
the compact schools definition I only
concern with a 65-foot height is that
once it's in code you can only
sixty-five feet and there might be a
need in the future too
so in the past we've always had to go
for a variance or an adjustment to be
able to build a three-story school well
part of what we were trying to do last
year was to increase in allowable
Heights so that we could at least get to
a three-story school without having to
to go for a variance in the past we were
working on property that we owned so
there was less risk a good probability
that we get the variance but we weren't
looking to buy new property that might
cost millions of dollars and have to
gamble or risk that on the possibility
that well this time you're not going to
get a variance so we wouldn't be able to
do what we wanted to do if you looked at
Clark elementary it's a three-story
elementary it's the first one that we
did because it's on a very compact
footprint and small lot size it fits
just under the 65 feet so we felt that
that was probably an appropriate
solution we are currently looking at
some other sites particularly a middle
school site where we may be four stories
with two stories of parking below now
that's not going to fit within 65 feet
but there's also variation in how your
building height is measured in the
ordinances depending on whether it's on
a down sloping site we ran up sloping
site so that that changes things too
that site was approved for other
projects that had much higher buildings
and so it has a son who has some
individual development oh look at that
but I was remiss could you introduce
yourself I'm Steve Crawford executive
director of capital projects for the
s-cross School District and I'm an
moorim the current president of the
school board and I'm really here to you
know engage in here about this
conversation because it's certainly
something that the school board and the
City Council talked about actually two
years ago when we had or two-and-a-half
years ago when we had a linkage and now
we're finally coming back to to defining
all this so I just I wanted to sit in on
it contribute if I can and then see
where we can have the school board and
City Council potentially in the future
you know have a conversation about this
as well that'd be great
so let's get back to the definition are
you comfortable with the definition as
they are so if we look at urban schools
the most part that's okay on the end of
the third line it says they serve and
are designed for children to walk or
bike to if I take that in a literal
sense it means that they're going to be
designed for walking and biking access
only
we are a school district of 109 square
miles an average even if we build our -
after we build our two new elementary
schools in elementary school serves over
well close to five square miles
middle school serves when we get the
sixth one bill over 18 square miles in
high school it's only 7 square miles so
so we do have elementary schools at this
point that are non bus serving schools
we have some elementary schools and
locations where they're predominantly
walking biking mm-hmm
those are fortunate and those are nicely
located we don't have quite the
flexibility today with the scarcity of
land yep we have King County that's
established policy that says we can't
build schools in the rural area so we
know that we're gonna have to bust all
of the kids in the rural area into the
urban area so we also know that a lot of
kids have a lot of afterschool
activities whether it's sports or other
educational appointments medical etc
that there's going to be some level of
driving we visited Seattle schools and
they they don't have provision for Aaron
pick up drop off and the streets around
those schools are 100% totally congested
in the mornings and afternoons and the
neighbors are pretty unhappy about it so
I think that there is appropriately an
emphasis on the fact that we would try
and locate those schools so that they
would be predominantly walking but it
reads a little bit too much like it's
only walking and biking and I'm pretty
confident
particularly when you know I know there
will be special education buses as those
kids come from diverse geographic area
so I think something in there that talks
about primarily
bus service G for Wow
I mean if you just put the word
primarily designed for children to walk
and bike to not necessarily hope it
helps oh wow hey I'm open to suggestion
yeah well uh I mean there's a one of the
new proposed policies G for also states
it's gonna they're the compact in urban
schools will be designed to accommodate
primarily bus traffic and in not car
traffic so it kind of calls that out as
well right except there you're getting
back into the mix of compact and urban
so that may be true an urban right in
the central Issaquah purchases that is
true in a compact school outside of
central is quad probably isn't going to
be able to go that far not not in the
type of schools even even with the type
of school we were trying to build in the
compact site on the hilltop it would it
would never just be bus our I guess it
would be bus but it'd have to be school
bus and not just transit which is one of
the things gets mentioned at one point
as well yeah okay so can we correct this
and then move on to all these other
things that might cause hookups and we
don't have to do emotionally with the
school district says I mean thinking
about it I don't think living in the
highlands and coming down at between
quarter to nine and quarter after nine
takes 45 minutes to get through that
stop sign
yes it does so is that something that we
want based on the fact that there's
going to be more traffic in the urban
core based on more people how does that
help
well I think in in an area where there
is more traffic you will have stoplights
and kids crossing at stoplights rather
than crossing guards which is our
problem up in the highlands in addition
to the people dropping their kids off
yeah I agree and I think bringing up the
point of Seattle schools where there
isn't parking and it affects the
neighboring areas obviously shows that's
something to consider even in a very
dense environment because I believe in
Seattle some of the schools actually
some of the streets next to those
schools actually shut down during peak
hours like the streets and a number of
the Seattle schools are located where
there's a grid street pattern and some
as you say those streets are closed that
becomes the vehicle pickup drop-off in
the street on the other side of the
block is often the bus pick-up drop-off
we don't have too many locations where
we have a grid pattern Oh I mean because
that doesn't exist we have to
accommodate that vehicle and bus pick-up
and drop-off on-site which tends to make
the sites bigger
it'd be nice if we had nice grid
patterns but then you're back into the
situation that's similar to what you
have at Grand Ridge where the buses was
dropping off parallel to the street
which is really earn many many years was
the only way in and out of the
neighborhood above that well we don't
have buses a grande ridge but yes the
idea that people are pulling in parallel
to the street yeah so
so as far as the definition is is it
wise to add that that word primary just
to open it up a little bit I don't think
you're gonna ever get a school where the
kids are not going to be dropped out of
them or buses or I don't think that you
can and I agree I think it's very
specific and that and that sentence and
I would like to open it up so that not
so narrow I mean the thing we're talking
about is our children and we need to
make them safe and we need to get them
schools so how would you like to change
that would it be enough to primarily to
walk and bike to as a fine as a
definition we get into some of the other
details later on in like policy G for
that talks about bus priority instead of
car priority yes we have to get into the
whole urban versus a little bit right so
let's go through this so I like the word
encourage they serve and are designed to
encourage children to walk bike and play
there to kind of consensus and courage
right primarily so primarily is probably
better work - and so primarily designed
to encourage children to walk her right
okay you get both it okay so moving on
to compacts goals okay so that's
everything outside of the core area
which is okay and understandable
pedestrian friendly design is okay
architectural interest through variety
building heights and forms that's okay
there's some multi-story development
we're already doing that
that's okay okay ruptured parking yeah I
think there's gonna have to be some type
of structured parking no matter what you
do and you know we've we had shown
structured parking on the proposal for
the hilltop site we're using structured
parking and we had shown structured
parking before we even got started
beyond the bond issue planning for the
high school in the future middle school
as well so structured parking is okay
and sites typically smaller than
traditional suburban schools that's okay
yeah it doesn't it doesn't commit you to
anything it's just a general statement
so that's take the only thing that I
would bring up is Connie is comment that
she sent in talking about how there
isn't any maximum necessarily proposed
here and so in the policy so we talk
about a minimum lot size for them a
minimum lot size right so that you so
that the lot itself is smaller that you
start with instead of starting with a
big suburban size lot you're starting
with a much smaller lot so where does
that one of the person I understood
Connie's concerned was well if the bio
forty acre site you build new tree
school on it for five acres are you
still gonna it declare all the land and
pave every 90 all ninety percent of it
right well let be but in feasible and
practical thing to do that wouldn't
happen right yes but if we looked at
maybe a larger site of a 12-acre you
know not not necessarily going to the
full extent that you were talking about
but something another issue becomes the
actual amount of usable land on a site
Pacific cascade Middle School has about
Nate
there's a usable land on a 45 acre
parcel oh I would hate to have a maximum
parcel size as a limit because you could
end up with that kind of a situation
where less than half of its actually
usable when you take out the slopes and
wetland areas and things like that right
and that's why our number was actually
usable because we know most of the sites
that are left are troublesome so where
does it talk about the idea of a usable
lot size I think let's see where is that
land use policy g5
yeah g5
I'm usable acres
okay and I think that address is unused
to concern there
well usable addresses the question of
usable acreage as opposed to total
acreage but recites should be less than
five usable acres that's all the way out
of the realm of usability an elementary
school if you just take a three-story
building with parking underneath it even
in the Highlands proposal that was
almost seven acres you guys have a
twelve and a half percent tree retention
so if you're looking at a site with
trees theoretically twelve and a half
percent of it's going to be reserved for
tree retention if you add up just an
acre of space for a elementary play
field and the area of the building
and 50% of the parking year over five
acres if you add up the same I mean the
footprint of a three or four story high
school is going to be three acres before
you have anything else and so your if
you add up the minimums on high school
your you're pushing twenty acres of
usable space okay and did hilltop remind
me did hilltop have a field okay it was
it was a compact I remember it was a
yacht it was small but I couldn't
picture quite where it was but okay take
a look at that would you rather it be
separated by type of school you know
like you said six or seven acres for an
elementary well that would be a better
it would help you and you're right we
can't build a middle school in the city
of s qua we can't build a high school in
the city of s o'clock once again this is
saying urban and compact right now this
is in the entire city of Issaquah that
no school could be on more than five
usable acres right so this just proves
that every school is different and you
can't have specifics that have to be
adhered to because every school is
different every land live every lot is
different every remainings for half of
land and if it was six or seven for
elementary and twenty for high what
would you say for middle
[Music]
I mean just estimate what I won't want
to refine the numbers a little bit the
Tao of sight is 8.9 acres and we can't
fit a softball field on there and so
[Music]
it's probably 11 or 12 or are you
planning on any shared resources so if
we you know if we're moving into a
liquor site or policy where we have less
students in a building than we do
typical Icicle a day does that require
its unfilled or do you envision to
school or to micro schools sharing
facilities you have some need for
recreational space at each school you
might end up in this situation sharing
some facilities but if you're at an
elementary school you don't have that
much time for recess oh you're not going
to go walking down the block that's
gonna have some apparent safety security
concerns as well that is if you can cite
to schools close together otherwise
you're going to be putting the kids in
buses taking them to another school
there wouldn't be time for that in a
school day plus in the school's PE which
is really a subject uses up our outside
facilities as well so they're they're
not just used for recess there are
actually educational facilities and
spaces that would be used throughout a
day by each of the schools
but but like Tallis had a the track and
a field in the inside the track though
right but just not enough room for a
softball
okay correct so it has some some but not
all not as much as what our other middle
schools have right right like right so
you'd end up sharing like a thing in
football or something they'd have to go
to some other place
well the the field inside that track
it's football soccer and lacrosse so all
three of those are pretty heavily used
by the community after school Oh
part of this policy says that we should
be providing recreational spaces for
community use right we also need those
at the high school and middle school for
PE programs
you mean the elementary school it's it's
recess and and the community use
afterwards a crack at a middle school is
huge I mean there's 250 kids that
participate in the track program and
most of the middle schools and then
again it's a lot I mean we don't have
middle school football teams but the
space gets used heavily for leader to
use on that site if they didn't have the
softball field then they have to use
like either one of the other middle
schools they're gonna have to get
transfers not to us or to support middle
school and share mm-hmm right so that's
an example of where we we we could share
and use one of your facilities if we
were able to use Tibbets for it because
that would in that particular clay case
be closest or have to bust them to the
other middle schools that have those
softball fields right
okay mr. Crawford can I ask you a
question I'm Emily art at a Senior
Planner with the city of Issaquah I was
looking at Gibson school which looks
like a very compact school but it was
really hard to tell like Zach exactly
what the FA are for that was and how the
the students get their recreational
facilities met there even though it's
smaller where the smaller school
population still has the same needs
they used the gym and the weight room
that was a part of the old Issaquah
middle school that's still there for
their use as well as a hard surface play
area outside that's probably the size of
a couple basketball courts and those
students are typically at school three
days a week then that's a program that
has a large internship yeah they have
internships on Tuesdays and Thursdays so
the kids aren't really on campus it's a
very different model of school so get
some structure in this instead of going
back and forth and and not being able to
come up with a decision on anything we
go back to policy a and and just kind of
tear that apart so if you look at c5
okay let's do one you're doing the UCA
one and just just yeah
I would like to see a family that has a
second grader put that child on a
transit bus I was just gonna mention
that I think that it's a challenge to
try to say that or to think that we're
not gonna have school buses although
when I was in high school I took a
transit bus mm-hmm for high school that
it's certainly but it was a completely
different kind of school but in a
definitely different area kind of world
that we have now the school buses
transported between you know it's over
eight thousand kids in the morning and
in the afternoon if you have I or Ty's
transit as it isn't going to be able to
provide the service and you're going to
end up having a whole lot more parents
driving their kids to school and transit
wouldn't come anywhere close to serving
the entire population area of the
district that was rather problematic for
elementary I think we were thinking more
the staff but it says provide
alternatives to school buses right so
that takes me to kids
right so we should separate that out
into I don't think what it says is wrong
but I think it needs to be clarified
just like we clarified the first
definition of urban schools it's always
great to reduce automobile trips and and
greenhouse emissions all that stuff is
good but is it saying you have to know
well I think minimize Auto dependence is
good it just says seek locations that
provide these benefits it's not
providing any requirement that school
buses be replaced with transit or
anything like that
I think it's just enabling opportunities
with things like school siting and
weather protection as long as the city
doesn't look at that and say that says
this and whoever is in charge at that
point in time says well it this is what
it says this is what a great we agreed
to and the alternative to school buses
is we're not going to allow you to have
a bus pick-up and drop-off area I guess
the word that's probably troublesome is
the word alternatives because again if
students are the greatest part of the
population the best way to transport
students still sounds like school buses
not necessarily cars or public
transportation that's the greatest way
to move that amount of people I guess
the word alternatives is right in front
of school buses is what makes it because
somewhat of Troubles that statement
school buses after the most number of
kids it's also an urban school and we're
the second the line I write about that
we call it pedestrian bicycle routes
right which kind of are part of the same
sentence as an alternative to Moses oh
so you're putting it with the front I
like that so I think we probably need to
rewrite that a little bit so that we
talk about the safe pedestrian and
bicycle routes and the kind of the
things that are gonna transport the kids
differently than staff citing for staff
to use transit routes I think if you put
a period after transit routes that takes
care of eating locations that offer safe
pedestrian bicycle routes and nearby
transit routes
those are siting kinds of thing then I'm
not sure how we were
I don't think you can provide
alternatives to school buses but I don't
know that you want to say okay going on
that instead of putting a period there
what if you have that sentence go to
nearby transit routes and then eliminate
everything from there to making it
easier so you're just saying site the
locations nearby transit routes making
it easier for students teachers and
staff to walk bike or bus to school
that's fine because the bus is there
exactly nice but this this I'm just
playing devil's advocate yeah so it says
seek locations does that mean that you
have to have those type and you add
something that says based on the land
based on the where it is based on best
planning Smart Growth something that
allows some there's a limit to the
policy it's just it's aspirational
though I mean it's it's not a
requirement like the code would be it's
um it's sort of giving you the flavor of
what we're looking for when we're citing
them okay so what are the things that
make it a good site versus I'm not as
great site that's how I view it is that
it wouldn't be even be held to meeting
each one of them but it's certainly
aspirational okay as long as it's known
that it's aspiration right okay I think
the way the school district read that is
that this is a way it's going to be and
if that's not specifically if this is
just what we would like it to be that's
a little different right
I think seek seek locations is okay we
would be trying to find locations and
provide safe and efficient routes to the
school you guys are obviously trying to
maximize your land use anyway yeah if
you can't find one that that and if
there's no transit route that's anywhere
close well you've looked at alternatives
and there's a basis for the decision
that this is the best place right and
this is still just about central
Issaquah right right it should also be
your aspiration to have transit
everywhere in central Issaquah thanks
therefore if we cite a school in central
Issaquah it will be near transit all
right exactly
okay believing it the way it is okay too
okay
it's the same as when I was in the Arts
Commission we were trying to find places
to have big concerts you know we thought
oh the school district we can use that
facility but we can't because it's used
all the time
in the high school mm-hmm yeah that's
one thing that we initially were
thinking as well but when we started to
look at the schedule of school use the
only time that was available for
community use was the summer and that's
not when the Community Programs
take place so I think the kids come
first so that is true because it's an
educational facility yeah fine yep okay
three
that's okay we've been ever since we
built the first school and in every
building since 2000 as complying with
Washington's
sustainable schools protocol which is an
essence similar to LEED Silver and in a
few years now but the last time we
looked we doubled our footprint area and
our BTU consumption was the same as it
had been before
we've been doing sustainable practices
and green building strategies for years
okay
the district is a green ribbon school
district and all of the schools are
level 3 on King County's I make a
request to staff cookies in lighter
color so we can realize that after we
printed it it was like oh I need another
color instead of green
sorry about that got my magnifying glass
to see if I could read it I did - okay
gee that's good question as we do G so I
understand that the policies that the UC
policy a 1 a 2 a 3 that we just did that
central Issaquah and that central is qua
only when we go to the the Linton I
guess the like may induce right land-use
Golgi and this comprehensive plan is
that covering all of us upon now right
right so I think we should probably look
through these and figure out if there
are specific ones that diverge in their
needs between compact and urban I don't
think that one does I don't think these
ones do I think looking further in is
what you're talking about
okay
no problems let's simply Zerbo the next
one
I think it's g4 where we come in to the
idea of bus priority versus car priority
and I would even throw in the idea of
walking and biking priority sounds like
we've talked about an urban school
should be walking and biking priority
with bus as secondary and a compact
school would be bus priority with car
secondary does that make sense
mm-hmm okay so you also can take the
students from the immediate community if
you're doing compact schools outside the
city you're going to be busing things in
from the Y you are right that's back on
g3 the words around from the immediate
community I mean we draw it's from the
area it takes to fill the school right
we have to I mean we do have we have
kids at squall middle school that come
out of Bellevue because that's that's
where I live and that's where the
nearest middle school is is this quant
middle school so so yes we always take
kids from the immediate community but
the immediate community could be quite a
few square miles right because we have
to that's always the goal to have kids
be close to the school close but it's
it's certainly not necessary you will
never have middle schools with all
walking because there's not enough
density to produce enough kids that can
walk to a middle school so we don't have
enough children to only build schools
for Issaquah children we we have to
assume population from outside the city
we certainly do where there's cross
school district 110 square miles and if
it's from the City of Bellevue yeah
Castle Cove you rezoned
in King County I remember being bused in
from do vault atoll that sounds cross
city lines so how does a decision made
then so if we need to build a cop back
school we see the growth how do we make
the decision on whether we build it
inside the city limits or we build it in
a view or a good part is where do we
find the land so the land is so limited
now we build where we can find land so
you're always looking at where your
attendance areas are where the growth is
transportation access routes and where
parcels are available the availability
of land is is a big driver and and where
we have the overcrowded schools right so
where we have the growth and we have
more kids than really should be in those
schools Rives where we want to put
schools offload the full schools and
what's your outlook now for what's on
the horizon is it within it's a compact
Warren or is it outside of the sequester
limits right now right now we have one
out we've acquired a site for an
elementary school that's in Sammamish
that will serve really both is quite an
Sammamish because it's right there near
the separation between us on Sammamish
the middle school is that we're site the
site that we're looking at for the
middle school is inside the city limits
site that we prefer for the high school
also accommodates an elementary school
and that's in the city limits in the
city limits it's not in the core area
right so they'd be under your compact
schools versus your urban school so the
next three schools the school district
will be within his quad city limits that
is our goal I mean that's our hope at
the sites we've identified that we're
attempting to acquire it's good to know
because that's just even more traffic
that's coming into the city in the form
of buses and stores for instance in the
middle school the site that we're
looking at off of SR 900 allows us to
bring in some kids out
of the Maywood middle school on the
south end of the district which is our
most heavily populated overcrowded
middle school we know that there's a
pretty significant growth occurring in
the Newcastle area and you bring those
kids into this while middle school
creates more urban traffic if the 900
site works out it's a really short quick
trip in to that site from Maywood tennis
area and from Newcastle it keeps kids on
the west side of the city and out of the
urban core which helps reduce traffic
that's getting to spawn middle school
works out really well those are the
kinds of things that we're trying to
look at you know that this high school
is overcrowded it's too big Oh a line is
also overcrowded and too big the site
that we're hoping to acquire for high
school is in the middle it'll allow us
to bring both of those school
populations down which is going to
reduce the traffic in the core area on
Second Avenue it goes so with that in
mind considering the Asuka School
District does stretch across multiple
cities would having requirements and
regulations like this encourage you to
build in other cities or would it allow
you actually to build more in Issaquah
because you could do something on a
smaller site we're gonna do something on
a smaller site primarily because there
isn't a bigger site available if there
was a bigger site available for the same
kind of money I would advocate for
buying that because in the district have
some land bank for the future but that
just doesn't exist so would it would
this would it drive us to other other
areas yeah well if we had to build every
if you said absolutely you got a build
on five acres or less we're gonna have
to go somewhere else does it make more
sense to
by compact in urban schools wait say
that again is it I'm just throwing it
out since we combined both of them
should we separate them so if there's
enough difference that you guys find
between the two schools well I looked at
it initially like there are some central
area plan policies here that I think
pretty well defined what the goals were
for the urban core school area mm-hmm
and that the second part was I viewed it
more as the areas outside of the core
and that I think it would be cleaner
easier to understand if those were
focused on the compact schools outside
the core I think it makes more sense to
divide them if they have different
requirements I don't know how you can
lump them together but that's where it
kind of got difficult hmm and we haven't
even got to the metrics yet as far as
density do the other cities have the
same goals as far as density air B that
we're building for Issaquah
like just some how much have added
definition even for a compact school
does even own a cup a school yeah so
we're splitting these out but we still
have schools outside of our control that
are in their cities it right I'll fall
within that definition does that drive
your decisions of where you build her
you just always in the mindset let's
make it as dense as we possibly can go
and fall burger if they got so
restrictive that it made it really
really difficult to build and it's a
while we would I'm gonna be forced to
look at I mean to find more actively
property and other adjacent areas which
is why we invite you here to provide
comment to tell us when we're hitting
that edge and what we're trying to do is
come up with a set of policies that
works for the city that works to allow
action of schools in the city because
sites that we would see is our first
choices after one are all currently in
the city of is well it's the school
districts prerogative to build primarily
in the city you'd prefer to build your
schools within city limits if possible
you mean the city of specifically the
city of miss quad we want to build the
schools where the kids are so as we have
more growth in Sammamish that's why
we're building an elementary school in
Sammamish meet that need now it will
probably draw us it may draw some from
Issaquah as well because it's up near
claw honey which draw from out of it
right which couldn't remember the border
is between us Quan Sammamish so I mean I
don't think we sit here with the goal of
just building in the city of Issaquah we
want to build where the kids are I mean
we might have been happy to build a
middle school down in the south and
where we own land but it was outside the
urban growth boundary and therefore we
couldn't
problems so Trish did you get the
commentary that we kind of want to split
to take compact urban out and make sure
whatever we've said about urban are
clear in that central perfect the idea
being that these would just be about
compact they're not applying to urban
yeah frightening yeah it's a challenge
when you say though that urban is a
subset of common because then you would
think in the reverse that it would apply
to urban but right and I think we just
make sure when we went back to look at
the urban ones that we captured some of
the pieces that we thought should
actually prescribe to those as well
and for that I would say the I one of
the differences I see is that it's a
walk and bike priority followed by bus
rather than making it just a bus
priority followed by cars so I'm saying
bus priority followed by cars is compact
correct yes the way it's written right
now yes yeah yeah but urban schools you
would add in a layer of walking and
biking priority and maybe that it only
applies to an elementary where you're
really going to be able to achieve that
pulling in from the areas around but at
least it talks about that you have the
density you have the goal if you have
enough density that we'd have enough
kids to have them walking you know
whether that actually works whether
there are enough kids generated by the
type of housing is is the bigger unknown
and topography plays into it as well
because in the urban core it's gonna be
flat oh it's gonna be easier to walk and
bike islands is a challenge
and we have more people that drive then
we would hope because it was supposed to
be walking Telus would be an entirely
different house you know we did a study
and there's almost nine percent of the
kids that would go to that middle
that come out of the Tallis community
which was a surprise to me but some of
those kids are walking maybe to school
that might get picked up to go home
[Music]
those are different challenges that
affect the means of the graphs a
I don't think you can meet every need in
a policy document a document like this
so yeah we're just trying to make
something that's flexible enough that it
satisfies your goals and allows for
construction the schools we don't spend
our 24 hours a day thinking about how to
plan schools like you do so do any of
the other okay so in g3 we're gonna
partner with the city you meet the
anticipated growth of the city that's
gonna happen do recognize that we have
to accommodate the growth that occurs
throughout the whole district there's
another layer there as well and I think
the rest of it is pretty much okay so
you had a problem with the immediate
community idea I was gonna propose new
compact schools should be located to
offer safe pedestrian bicycle transit
and public access just basically take
out that primarily served students from
the immediate community and
or
moving right along
what says including bus only drop off
and pick ups along Street corridors with
pathways to the facility I wasn't quite
sure there we're gonna have bus priority
but we're still going to have some cars
and so you don't really have much noise
Street corridors it sounded like what
you described about Seattle having the
bus drop-off and pickup happening on a
public street is what's being described
here and I'm not sure if that was our
thought process or intention I and it
might have been back to mixing compact
and urban and maybe that could have been
a thought in urban even though yeah it's
not a great idea but definitely not with
compact we do you want to separate buses
and cars the street corridor part is
including bus only drop-offs and pickups
pathways to the facility
it's you removed for the long straight
quarter so we had we'd have our own
lanes yeah I would eliminate the long
straight corridors with pathways to the
facility because those should be up
against the facility on your property
that you want to keep the idea of
additional pathways from like transit
stops do you want that in a compact
school or does that only apply to an
urban school it's not likely that you
would have transit out in where we'd
have compact schools that would be able
to bring in kids you know and if there
is a public transit stop I mean a
pathway from that to the school would be
a good idea because perhaps staff
transit you access the school if we're
planning for the future I think I might
be a transit I think that's okay I'm a
little bit unsure about designed as bus
priority instead of corporator that's
okay but including bus only drop-offs
and pickups does that preclude having
Auto drop-off and pickup where does that
mean that the bus pickup is supposed to
be separate from cars I think we were
trying to figure out how you could
continue the bus priority and make it
easier to if I'm a parent and I'm
waiting a long time to drop off my kid
oh I would start thinking twice that
maybe I should put my kiddo on the bus
right but now we're back out in those
compact schools where we can't prevent
parents from coming to school you come
in and it's dropping off and pick a
priority it's like there's two left-hand
turns at second and what if those were
only bus and so if you're if you're the
mom or the dad you have to draw it you
can't make the left there you have to
find a different way to get to the
school because buses have priorities to
get there you know that kind of thinking
not that that wouldn't be a disaster for
that corner well it's like an Avenue
would
mindset of how do you how do you make it
more incentives and make it easier for
folks to ride the bus part of the time
you can't always do it on the way home
because you've got stuff going on but my
mind that's a balance between the idea
that you want to minimize car traffic
and make it a little more difficult for
parents but if we don't accommodate the
parent traffic we're gonna back out up
into the street right it's going to be a
problem right then we're not meeting the
goal of trying to minimize our impact to
the adjacent neighborhood right right
yeah I'm not saying that accommodate
them I'm just trying to make the bus
have more incentives to think of you
know that's really an okay way to do it
so Tricia I like your description
because I wasn't getting that from
saying bus only drop-off and pickup
salon Street corridors so being able to
say something about incentivizing bus
traffic or prioritize do you say that we
can fiddle with it Jamia traffic
controller incent intent and controlling
the traffic yeah right but that would be
helpful because now when I do really
begin it says including bus only
drop-off pickups as if you don't allow
for any other drop-off and pickup mmhmm
right but I can see trying to prioritize
so that the and we always actually
probably for the most part do because we
want to get those buses rolled in and we
do always want to make busing the most
attractive way for kids to get to school
yeah and I'm sure you look at the
schools around that have the highest
busing rates and you go what worked well
there and how can we make that happen on
other sites so something that would
allow for the drop-off and pickup with
cars but prioritize bus right
rice is fine
we have one more
I would love to know what it says cuz I
can't it says sighting of compact an
urban school should reflect land
scarcity by using smaller footprints on
lot smaller than that no different
recommended state minimum acreage ie
site should be less than five useful
acres we already discussed the idea of
separating that out to make a suggestion
for elementary versus middle versus high
school sure we should put a number in
there like we have an ARV goal right we
have a density goal already the school
district needs ten acres for population
they have a density goal that's gonna
help fill that up right I don't know if
we need a minimum number or so the
reason to put a minimum number on it
would be that these definitions of
compact and urban schools have certain
requirements and also certain benefits
to the school district such as being
able to have a lot of impervious surface
whereas if it was a larger site we don't
necessarily want to both give those away
and put the same responsibilities on
them that they would have to you know
meet a certain F AR and you know have
various other things so there's a reason
to have so they choose a ten acre site
they don't have the same density calls
as a five acre site well I think we're
just trying to make them have the
smallest footprint possible right so if
they had twenty acres maybe they would
use twelve of them
maybe the other eight would be like a
theater building that everybody can use
or they would find a way to use their
land really efficiently for what they
need it for and maybe not use the whole
the whole piece we're trying to figure
out a way to say that there's that big
number that would control that right
there's the usable space right the FA
are they can still use the whole site we
don't limit the size of the line on that
in a compact school we were thinking it
might be a good idea for an urban school
to try to limit the the minimum lot size
so that it's not a really big site that
is sort of a sprawling kind of a thing
to try to make sure that we do and not
that we would but just to sort of plan
ahead that that's what makes it
different one of the reasons it's
different than a compact school is it's
even more smaller footprint it's even
more compact okay so I think maximum
acreage minimum well these are maximum
minimum sounds like we need a maximum is
Waldo kind of compact less than would be
a maximum yeah okay right
Yeah right okay yes it's a maximum it
has to be less than putting a maximum in
the house as a real challenge there's a
state minimum Anchorage is that what
you're coming up with the five acres no
this is no very high they're 10 20 and
44 okay so the challenge become just
even so the site that we're looking at
to put a high school on an elementary
school on we're gonna fill up the whole
site but there's gonna be probably about
four acres of that site along the
roadway that's on a steep slope and we
want to preserve the trees there and
we're not gonna build there because a
it's not feasible right
you put a maximum acreage on it well
maybe it doesn't work anymore
well this is usable acres
right so that would account for that but
I completely agree that five usable
acres is not the number that we need I
think the reality of the world we live
in is that you know there aren't any
sites that are just gonna allow you to
go out and buy 40 acres and and we don't
have the money to develop more than what
we need to anyway right oh I mean a more
compact footprint building is more
economical to build than a one-story
spread out old California campus plan
right a lot more energy efficient that
drives us to build a more compact the
print and compact perimeter or exterior
area of a building I think it's just a
challenge because again if you go back
to the PCMs site it's 45 acres but it's
painting usable and what if we found a
site that was 20 acres
but we had a 10 acre maximum on it we
not buy it because you won't let us
build on it cuz it's bigger no I think
that we have to subdivide it I think we
would try to figure out a way that like
the the 45 and the 19 the 19 would be
within that window of because there's
two schools there but I think if you the
other scenario you said if it's 20 and
it's all buildable and you're just
putting a smaller school on it maybe you
put part of it
you know in a native growth protection
easement or something to keep the
landscaping to keep the tree canopy so
that it's not ninety percent impervious
over the whole twenty acres it's move us
to to clear the extra land and pave it
right no purpose right I think we're
just trying to figure out how do we how
do we have that as our aspirational
thought is that they are smaller and
tall
and compact and how do you how do you
say that aspirationally without tying
your hands well I think it says that and
first part on lot smaller than that of
recommended minimum acreages right we're
gonna reflect the land scarcity by using
smaller footprints on lot smaller than
that recommended state minimum acreage
well does say it does say should it
doesn't say shall and there and it's not
tied to a development regulation either
so sleep policy g6 talks more about what
we're talking about which is using the
least amount of land and building up
instead of out so I think we address
those things we just need to figure out
if we're going to eliminate the site
should be less than five usable acres or
replace it with some kind of
recommendation for each of the different
types of school because the standards
once the standards are written they can
be with all kinds of options available
we don't have any standards right now
but what if there was a standard that
said something around five acres with
some sort of exceptions allowed for this
or for that or with you know some other
options available should a site come up
that's more than that I mean does that
really accomplish much other than
putting the burden on planning staff to
the future point
as we know it wouldn't be realistic for
anything but an elementary school if
we're still keeping five acres because
you could live in a middle school in
high school on five acres unless you did
unless you did more of those alternative
schools like Gibson or something like
that they don't house very many yeah
that houses like less than 200 kids so
we have one over six thousand high
school kids as we go to build a new high
school the high school we want to build
is going to have to handle at least
sixteen hundred kids so there's a huge
difference in the size of those types of
violence yeah well yeah school that size
realistically doesn't sound compact it
couldn't be compact power that type of
school yeah it is for that type of
school versus the oldest high
school which was one story all the way
spread out covered all the space where
now is high school in this core middle
school were well we had Clark in there
too so but it's a very different design
to now have a three story of high
school the three story is called middle
school that used to all be one story I'm
getting confused on these um even like
on the G three and four were you
changing it so that that was just
referencing compact schools right it's a
whole section the whole thing so even g5
is just about compact okay just want to
make sure yeah so if it's truly
aspirational is there something in
between what Bill and Lindsay was saying
where as g6 kind of is the aspirational
goal and then to Bill's point you strike
less than fought you know shall be less
than five and that kind of it frees up
their hands now we basically have put
our aspirational policy goal which is
that they will develop the land to the
best of their abilities up I think
there's two ways to do it you can use
the second policy the g6 to do that or
you can put you know guidelines or you
know some kind of wiggle word that says
generally Elementary's can be on seven
acre of usable land Middle School's 11
and 12 in high schools at 20 which
states what
less than the state minimum or maximum
minimum is and yet has guidelines that
you sort of gave us so everyone's in the
same ballpark
I think G six really kind of solves the
whole thing because urban compact school
design should use the least amount of
land for development and supporting
infrastructures that's reasonable under
the circumstances by building up using
your bike parks recreational facilities
when available and using you know I
think that takes care of the whole thing
it's the least amount of land necessary
to support the facility so Trish my
concern with putting a requirement of a
small requirement of acres in G five is
that the school district would face a
decision in trying to decide whether or
not to buy a lot that was say ten acres
for an elementary school if they're not
sure that they're going to get that
exemption or that allowance to be able
to build on that even if they were
intending to follow g6
I mean the reality of that situation
would be that we would have to put a
contract on a piece of land we're
interested in with a very long
feasibility period know that we would
get through the planning process and get
a variance to build on a bigger piece of
property otherwise we buy a piece of
property that we couldn't use it'd be
like King County changing the rules
oh yeah if you want to get rid of the
number we can yes how does the state
minimum work what is that you explain
that for an elementary 20 I believe it
is for a middle school and 40 it's nice
Keith is here so the state says you
can't build a high school on less than
40 acres those words were established
years and years ago okay they do allow
you to argue your point if you want to
build a school on a smaller parcel so so
how does that work if if we have you
build a compact school on five acres and
that violates the state minimum how does
what's that process for getting about
variance with the state now right all
right we're going to OSBI then we have
to show them that we can adequately
provide for a high school on thirty
acres or 27 acres or whatever it is okay
do you see any challenges with that
process going forward I've been a issue
in the past
oh it says recommended state minimum
Anchorage is it set in stone or is it
just a recommendation commended minimums
yes so it could be or you can work with
it you just have to do more legwork more
paperwork more I'm consuming money
okay so we're fine with that
mmm you decide to cross out the five
acres to try and make sure I knew seven
back back back back to the end of six
yeah okay okay
[Music]
we'll share parks and recreational
facilities when they're available rear
air but we'll share ours with you
avoiding the use of portables and
modular units is a little problematic
there have been some state OSPI
proposals you require the use of modular
units in building schools they are often
aligned towards old prototype schools
and through with various different
suggestions that we don't necessarily
agree with at a prototype school as
contradictory to hitting its
contradictory a compact schools for one
thing at one school for all for Eastern
Washington Western Washington every
school district is it's not really
appropriate they do sometimes come by
with and could end up implementing
requiring the use of modular units and
we use portables and I know that become
somewhat perma balls but some funding
isn't always available and we know that
even in for schools that we build we
will not eliminate the need for
portables if we hadn't had portables we
wouldn't have been able to manage
through the growth while we've been
trying to acquire land and build schools
since we passed the bond in 2016
portables are a really important part of
us being able to manage the growth
before we can build the new schools
minimize is a nicer word than avoid
mm-hmm so I think one of the ideas here
is to avoid opening a new school it
already has a need for portables and we
have that same goal and
would love to open the schools and not
have to put portables in for a while but
when it takes two years to acquire a
piece of property we've got another
thousand kids in the district that you
have to accommodate so and you also have
to remember that the only way we have
the money to build schools is to pass a
bond which we need our voters to help us
do right so so we don't we don't so it's
it's quite a planning process to be able
to see that see the growth identify
where it is put together a plan that
goes out and and takes it to our voters
to pass a bond it gives us the money to
be able to go out and acquire the land
and build the school we just say
minimizing the use of portables sure I
know you're going to use them at some
point in time and there's a reason at
times but minimize the use of them would
that before when you design an
elementary school do you leave a
footprint for portables correct that's
both in the design initial site approval
accommodates potential use of portables
and that the stormwater drainage
facilities are sized for that so that
when the need arises and we typically
find out from the school's what their
projections are in the spring and when a
school gets to a point where they need
more classroom space we get told that
next elementary needs in other new
classrooms we need to have a portable in
place for September one school
and we'll find out in the spring so we
put those for portable pads in on the
original planning documents so that all
the surface water storm drainage issues
are already designed in taken care of so
we're really just looking at building
permit building instead of having to go
through a whole new site approval
process which would take longer than the
summit so I understand that portables
are very cost effective and flexible way
to add and take away capacity but I
think the intent of the compact in urban
schools is to look at using land in a
more dense manner and bandi of just
setting aside open space or small one
storey buildings I'm not sure if that
fits the spirit of what we're trying to
get to with these policies in a suburban
environment definitely that makes that
makes total total sense to set aside a
small part of the of the of the school
footprint for portables so that we have
that have the flexibility but I'm I'm
trying to think through these the I'm
not sure if that meets what we're trying
to promote with these policies it was
there anywhere and it's a while you
could build a suburban school because I
thought that compact and what covered
everything with urban school covering
central Issaquah so as far as I can tell
there is no such thing as a suburban
school allowed in the city of Issaquah
right that's a compact school now okay
know that that's a good point yeah I
bring you up to speed we had kind of
decided that in the policy G area where
it does currently address compact on
urban schools that we need to kind of
break it apart and put herbs schools
back up into the higher area where we
had kind of talked about that and so
this area would end up being primarily
compact schools that being said I think
what you're stating about the the
building idea for particularly in urban
school wouldn't necessarily
resent space for that one story or even
blank land waiting for that that might
be true in the urban and it's going to
be true in some of the compact school
sites tala site probably won't have
space for for double portables for
future years will it will nice some
spaces where the sites are just too
tight to do that so in a play in a
situation like that do you build the
school you have empty classrooms Hominid
overflow how because we don't have money
to build empty space we've already
passed the bond that's given us the
money to build these schools to a
certain size and capacity so if the
money you're getting the money before
you know what the lot is gonna look like
and therefore you're gonna have
variances there to use the money in
different ways to build up you know
higher your wider there that's gonna
have cost variations there will be but
we're also building buying land and
building for new schools right so we
have that variation and there may be
some but we also have to make sure we
have enough money to build the other two
Elementary School's the high school and
that middle school bear in mind that the
cost of construction inflation on high
school elementary project is about five
hundred thousand dollars a month
whoa okay that's why it's really
challenging when it takes two years to
get through a process there's nothing to
sneeze at
No oh but these policies aren't just for
this bond it's also trying to lay out
policy so that when you guys do your
next bond so we're gonna need more
schools you can have good policies that
are in place so that when you sketch out
your bond you you know you guys know
what you're dealing with too so again if
you go back to the bond process and say
on this next elementary school we can't
put portables in so we need in other
eight classrooms and funding we need
another ten million dollars bond for
that school you do that you may not get
the bond to prove do you mean I have any
money in building school so yeah it's
always a challenge to find that sort of
sweet spot where you think you're going
to get enough money to do all that you
need you build in some level of an
inflation factor hope that the plastic
construction isn't going up as fast that
it is currently but you we can't in more
than what's really necessary we never
get a bond approved until they're really
seeing the whites of their eyes it's a
challenging act because on the flip side
if we build schools and had empty space
we would hear the negative you all you
over build you spent too much money you
came to us for too much money so it's so
all I'm saying is it's a challenge to
find the right amount to plan for it and
under you know we plan for how many kids
are coming we plan for how many
buildings to build and find that sweet
spot to go out and pass a bond with our
voters what do you do in the meantime
with the students they just go to a
different school okay we've been using
portable to accommodate that extra
growth and when there when it does get
to a point where it is simply too too
bit too many kids in one school we do
change the boundaries and try to balance
with the schools that are next to it if
you have space because they're already
probably getting full right and so it's
it's kind of balancing that fullness of
the schools while we're trying to get to
the point where we can bring new schools
online
and reset everything to a better place
and then traditionally the growth just
continues to happen then we refill them
again and so in this last Bond issue we
also had last room additions at six
different schools so we've finished
additions at sunset and cougar Ridge
that opened this last September and
discovery and endeavor will get
classroom additions and we'll open the
next September so when you get to a
point where you've already filled up all
the portable space at a school and you
still see there's growth coming and that
gets to be an issue that goes on to the
bond and so we'll make the school bigger
but when you do that you also have to
make some of the supporting base bigger
because at a feed more kids and lunch
and you don't have for lunches I mean oh
you got to make the Commons bigger and
the multi-purpose room bigger and we're
never going to get to a point again the
other thing that we've been doing on our
recent schools is providing space at the
end of a classroom wing for the
potential of a future edition so those
you know we're trying to be efficient
and forward-looking because we know that
in the future there's availability land
it's going to be even more scarce soon
and so than it is today I don't think
you're ever going to get to a place
where you will never use affordable and
I don't think it should be a little bit
there again the word minimize instead of
avoiding minimize or something to to why
it's better than you can't build it at
all yeah like solid stretch goals but a
lot of these sounds like policies here
are not in full control of what causes
affordable in the first place right so
yeah minimizer remove it altogether I
mean that is the goal is to minimize
them but if there's too many kids you
got to do something with them and so you
might need a portable I think what AJ
was saying particularly about urban
schools though is that maybe we should
address the idea that an urban school
doesn't necessarily provide space for
portable units I think that would be a
self fulfilling whole but if you wanted
to go back up into the poor area and
talk there I suppose that would be okay
but I think the reality is that those
are gonna be very very compact
footprints and not gonna have some floor
area a land area for I don't I don't
think you need to add that in but up to
you I think it should be in a policy or
an urban school to say that the land
isn't going to be used that way and I
really appreciate hearing they you've
already thought toward that and that's
great but it's good it's good to have
the nuns from both the policy side am
from the financial side you're speaking
to the financial need to not have
portables it's good also from the policy
side just to ensure it doesn't happen
so a mask a clarifying point chair about
this the words and avoiding the use of
portables and module units would be
moved to the urban schools policies or
just simply changed to minimize in the
compact school policies or both I have
an extra policy would be put into urban
as as a minimize or avoid I wouldn't
modifies this g6 shame minimized and
then had a new policy just for urban
schools uh says avoid I don't I don't
know if it means I don't think we need
in the word minimize because you have
the word reasonable
so using nearby public parks we're not
requiring that they use nearby public
art parks and nearby recreation
facilities so I I read I read the
avoiding the use of portable modular
units also is modified by the word
reasonable but it says avoid that's
that's a pretty clear definition of a
word and that is no I don't think
reasonable actually applies to come the
end of the sentence there
he says supporting infrastructure that
is reasonable I don't think it hurts
having minimizing in there the use of
portables you could put reasonable use
of portable modular units whatever I
think this is an important point I mean
yeah I understand
saying that it's very expensive to build
a school with empty spaces and that your
bond hasn't allowed that but in the
planning policy commission we're
thinking out twenty thirty forty years
and so we need to address this for that
period of time beyond this current bond
and thinking about how we want our
schools to be built without or
durable units because that has been such
a pervasive thing in the city of
Issaquah what would happen is that if
you can't use portables on a compact
school site in Issaquah and that school
gets full your boundaries are going to
be readjusted and your kids are going to
get bused to some other school no I
think we have said for urban it doesn't
make sense to use portables at all
because you're gonna have to build out
to the full site for compact I still
read
yes minimize but I also just want to
have that conversation say we'd like
that to do more I don't like portables
either but I don't like seeing a school
launched with portables is that becomes
a timing issue
and a communication issue with the city
on what the projected housing is so that
when you're creating your bond you're
doing it using that kind of future
planning data that says we're gonna have
two thousand extra houses in central
Issaquah that we're gonna have to yeah
and how many kids are gonna come out of
those two thousand so if you take it out
completely out of that sentence what
does that do for you what does it do
doesn't hold them to a standard Irie me
to take of minimizing portable yeah I
would rather say it and say minimize
just so you just so this it recognizes
that you talked about it well that's
where I am I'm just trying to I guess
there was something different between
avoiding and minimize the stress is
something I'm fine with minimize I just
it's a point of frustration it's also
frustrating for the school district to
have kids that they don't know what to
do with know I mean it's
you can't win either way yes but that
would be solved by building schools that
address the future needs even if that
does mean that there's potential
criticism for over building well if
there's enough criticism you don't get
the bonds pass which there will not be
schools so I think I mean the reality is
the unintended consequences you would
either have larger class sizes where the
kids will be bused somewhere else it
sounds like the middle ground is Steve
would like avoiding stricken out
completely and it sounds like Lindsay
would kind of like to at least have
minimized or something in there as
aspirational minimize is fine yeah I
think we try I realized you don't think
we do
but I'm not saying that I I just yeah I
don't look at a larger mmm-hmm I'm
period we open our new schools hopefully
we'll be able to yeah I think you if we
had a new policy this just tell
the urban schools where we say we're
going to avoid that gets us gone where
we are today okay if you okay but I've
waited in one of these other separate
one or how are we on it and then a
compact is what minimize minimize was
there anything in g7 that's great
seems like we've covered this before and
other ones maybe I'm wrong I don't see
the airliner that's really objection
it's not the ordinary she's looking over
Wilma's last time a bond got rejected by
the city or by bite by the district yeah
by the voters for a school expansion
back in the late 90s it would you agree
I mean yeah he ate there was one that
was went down and then he did it again
yeah I think it took three tries on that
at that time and finally passed it and
again I don't know if it was 99 or 2000
but right in that that window because
again schools were just so crowded that
we were finally able to get it past then
and then and then we worked very hard to
deliver on all the things we promised we
will do in those bonds all the projects
so that we have the vote of confidence
for the next bond and the next bond so
the last two or three have been improved
all in the 2000s and yes because we
passed him in 2006 2012 2016 but maybe
there was one of 2002 we're going back
farther than I can you keep him straight
it was probably a challenging
environment now post light rail or Sound
Transit grease which was a big chunk
change yeah yeah you'll get some tax tax
fatigue at certain point
it's it's always a challenge it's a
balance between what we'd like to have
and 2012 bond was focused all on
modernization and we needed funds to
bring older schools up date and it
didn't include any new space thousand 16
basically focused on new space because
we've ever and the Kimia we on the
community could see that there's a whole
heck of a lot of new housing units
coming on board the reality has just
taken us much longer to acquire the land
and then build the schools and we ever
could have imagined but you're doing a
good job the new the high school and the
high school in the middle schooler
fabulous it's the ones that we have but
I mean in in acquiring the land for the
new high school in middle school still a
work in progress but the middle school
was done not a new middle school that
we've not built we're working on
acquiring land they rebuilt Pine Lake
middle school I thought the I thought
the middle school is gonna take over the
old headquarters side I thought that was
is that a done deal is that still being
worked through current planning is that
we would retain the current
administration site for the future have
some land available to address the core
area development that we see coming that
you were heading for and look for
another middle school site very first
choice is that Alice I get the bottom of
the hill below every time okay
I've done deal yet sure so okay future
okay so 65 feet 65 feet only really
allows three stories so if you're gonna
build on a flat site in the urban core
area it needs to be higher than that so
in the core urban core the height
building height is what that's what I
thought
you can build an eight story office
building I don't see where they can't be
an eight story that's so Trish we have a
table that talks about standards for
public schools would it be possible to
create two different tables one for
urban one for compact
okay so if the buildings around it are
125 feet
you know why can't it be 65 feet or
surrounding zoning whichever is higher
sorry we used to have to meet the zoning
of the zone next to you and so
everything was super low super suburban
so that's why we created 65 or
neighboring zones if those are higher
than 65 not neighboring buildings okay
so it is if it's if it's in a
neighborhood that allows 90 feet or 125
it can do that right or but if it's in a
single-family zone then 65 is fine and
to ask it another way Steven and can you
imagine how I mean I know you can't see
totally into the future 2030 years but
how high do you think a school can be
and still be an effective school like to
do elevators get in the way of your
building or it can't be more than 8
storeys because of it it takes a
paradigm shift to school use because you
will be using elevators to transport
kids which currently limit right it
becomes an interesting question there
are schools in urban areas around the
world that are six or eight or nine
stories tall right you have more
supervision issues and such and it's
just something that you look at dealing
with in the future I think as far as at
this time planning for heights and the
urban or or the urban core plus the
central core matching the adjacent
Heights if they're higher than 65 feet
makes sense
I don't really know what will happen
okay that's very usual that's fair but I
think that that's a reasonable place to
go how would that even work would you
just kind of schedule the kids around
their classes only being on two floors
of the nine or eight floors or walkabout
and it's madness when you have the
school like unlike other building you
have a large amount of humans walking
every what 45 minutes 50 minutes to a
different location on cadence your
vertical circulation space has to become
bigger to transport the kids whites
you're gonna look at trying to
consolidate grade spans to minimize the
Travel Pass you're going to have
probably only indoor recreation
facilities and in those areas hopefully
there's some park space adjacent but
you're probably gonna have a gym that's
indoors and you may have a fenced-in
area on the roof that's your outdoor
play area I'm gonna be pretty compact at
that point if you're drawing from the
local community then you're drawing from
a group of people who will moved into
the urban area and they think they came
with some visions and expectations of
what that urban life looks like it would
be different I think then what the
majority of people are looking for for
there's bull age kids experience in
school that are move
into this play area today I can't see a
great school well any school more than
four or five stories because the kids
are gonna have to walk up and down the
steps they're not going to be able to
take the elevator would be impossible it
would be a madhouse
yeah you'd probably put first floor on
the bottom and fifth you know you're
either break it up by grade or maybe on
the top floor just administrative
offices or something like that or you've
got to top four that's an open air open
air you know
courts and playgrounds I'm up there yeah
there's things you can do so I I would I
went to 4,000 person high school that
was five buildings one of them was four
stories we did 10-minute passing period
and if you had to get from math to I
think it was English you said hoof it
you had 10 minutes to hustle it up for
one side of the other and we made it
work writing for college right it's like
it's just like it's just like going to a
community my high school is basically a
good Community College from a logistic
standpoint yeah it worked fine my
grandkids go to us eight story building
but there's only five classrooms five
stories they're not allowed to take the
elevator they have to walk up and down
the steps so they get their exercise
steps but any more than that I think it
would be unreasonable to unless you had
great Sun what about a building that
wasn't entirely school you can have
something in that you know maybe the
bottom two schools are in elementary and
then the top three schools are like the
school district office something like
that
it doesn't the point is it doesn't all
meet the building doesn't all need to be
considered models where the first three
floors would be school and you might
have an administration building offices
on top of that mixing public use with
school becomes the challenge terminal
only yeah but you could do something
like library on top with a different
entrance or something you know there are
other ways to think about it you know
your school might start on level two if
you had retail and commercial in the
ground floor but we'd have a separate
access off of another and it might be
four stories or in total the building
might be taller I think parents would
appreciate having a coffee shop on the
bottom floor Thank You kids school yes
very much so their requirement for
kindergarteners to be on the first floor
though you're getting those designing
the school I love it there was a code
requirement that primary grades had to
have direct ground-level egress the new
code it doesn't require that a new IV C
but there are still some jurisdictions
that hold to the old interpretation and
require primary grades to have direct
access to grade atavistic law would
probably be more forward-thinking yes
I'm sure we would be I'm not sure my
next question so you're comfortable with
height based on what is zoned around it
yeah because that would allow the
district to design the school what they
felt was appropriate I mean it could be
a high school and maybe that's looked at
a little differently Oh setbacks but an
urban school ever have zero setbacks
from side or rear yeah so I was reading
this yesterday and basically if you're
in a subdivision houses and your lot
line is 5 feet away from the house
you're able to build that school right
on that property not to line that's
there's a mill to line and there's a
front rear and side on
compaq school criteria currently right
but it also has a footnote that says if
it's adjacent to residential areas it
has to meet the adjacent residential
side okay as long as that's covered
because I read that and I thought well
gee that's not cool yeah I would
anticipate that any residential you
would be looking at in the urban core is
up a story density right well there is
this need to be updated for the side and
rear so for urban and zero rather than
seven that's what I'm writing down is
for when we float the urban standards
next year that we can at least start
with this conversation of what the
numbers would be that's what prompted me
to say what I did because it's a zero
are there seven rear yeah oh it's ooh
from urban right yeah and the build to
line or it could be say it's possible
that brings into the question of how are
we getting kids to this school and where
is pickup drop-off where the buses pick
up drop off so does that mean it's the
grid system where we can share the
street we have to provide for those
transportation ingress egress situations
outside of the the street system and
there's going to have to be some setback
from the property line that allows
happen
oh yeah it's possible overhanging second
floors so their buses skin five
underneath that might be an option yeah
are there any security concerns in this
day and age with maybe needing more
space for you know from land security or
perimeter security or in the building or
well I'm envisioning that this is gonna
be a building in which the kids are
contained I know once they're in the
building there
safe and secure it also have to be
consideration for kids being dropped off
before school and where the kids wait
when school cuz normally they go wait in
the front or wait in the back of the
school but if the school is built to the
outer lines where do the kids wait now
yeah oh it's come to school they don't
typically access through the front door
they're typically lining up and we use
our covered play areas as staging areas
and the stage typically around the back
of the building and enter into the
classrooms you minutes before class time
that they stage on the play area or not
the little energy before school starts
is you know staff don't want 500 and 600
kids running around the building for 20
minutes before school starts they're
there outside
there are obviously urban schools in
Seattle that have addressed that problem
so then I've seen some schools where
they have like a large commons area I
think that can be value in moving the
set back to zero but then having some
flexibility in the build to line with
understanding that that schools are
unique and having some language
allowance and flexibility in the build
to that the school might want to have
some kind of a typical setbacks for
stationary or a bus drop-off cerca or
one so it's gonna ask Steve directly is
0 to 20 still okay for urban I mean I
heard all the what-ifs but I didn't hear
if 20 is too small or just enough or
flexible enough because yeah I was going
where you were going AJ I wanted to know
what what if the property lane or at the
back of the sidewalk and he had a
drop-off Lane it would be no in the
front it'd be xx cuz I thought we said
the the side and the rear could be zero
but I was worried about the front is
zero to 20 still okay for the front a
bill to line cuz they're fitting the
weather protection this side in rear a
bill to or a setback a setback the way
there is no cider we're billed to
correct that's on the front calling for
it's only in the front is
really nice if you had a bill to of zero
to 20 all the way around well no there
is no that's my point there is no bill
to on the cider rear so you don't have
to build out it has so so it's so
setbacks is how much you have to setback
and so if it's zero you either can't
step back or you don't need to but
there's no there's there's no cider
we're a build too so if you want to set
back you're allowed to the only the only
place you're not allowed to set back is
more than 20 feet on the front would be
okay okay so zero to 20 is okay and then
zero for side zero for a rear sight back
is still okay okay because they still
have the there's no side or rear build
to so if you guys want to have a side
setback for laborers or whatever heads
that's still allowed it's not required
but still allowed building over the top
of it yep gonna move lot size less than
five years old
acres we're back to that no I think
we've already addressed that idea tend
not to go there just yet yeah and we've
looked at the bearing facility so is
there anything else that the school
district thinks that we need to discuss
do you need a bigger f AR and two for
urban oh yeah we have issues with the FA
are on the the minimum now for compact
schools okay we have issues for compact
issues for urban so I haven't done any
calculations on an urban FA are of 0.75
but I think that that's probably doable
okay and maximum of two again if it's
consistent with all of the other urban
policy adjacent that's probably okay and
appropriate okay yeah same approaches
tight yeah we allow for higher F ARS if
that's allowed in the urban core okay mo
tonight that makes sense
higher than higher than two yeah so it's
similar so no maybe no
some um if they are or no I think we
have maximum so we just mixed you guys
match it's two or greater
if the zoning allows for more similar to
sixty five or greater that's what solo
yeah that's good
the compact school sites is a problem
yeah and you don't count recreational
space and you don't count structured
parking space I can see that in a
commercial type or maybe even a
residential situation you would want to
maximize the rare footage of the
commercial space so the maximize the
square footage of the residential and
you wouldn't count the structured
parking press that's kind of kind of
productive to hitting to an FA are
because we're going to build the square
footage that the school needs to be and
if we don't have to count the structured
parking square footage we're not going
to get another 2,000 square feet of a
retail space or peaceable space or 12
more minutes and mmm not taking a
Liefeld recreational space out of the
lot area is really problematic as a
typical track-and-field area is or
points close to four and a half acres
and if we run FA ours on Middle School
on the talus site which is basically
utilizing ninety percent of that site
it's really really dense
we're under about 0.5 and if you look at
the high school site which is using
structured parking and compact footprint
building
but has a football field soccer track
baseball field softball and in
elementary school with some play field
area that's running at about point two I
think when we took that FA our stuff up
I don't know whether we were really
separating out the idea of compact and
urban schools I think no when we had our
medium just wanting to know what the
existing schools were knowing that none
of them are really there category yet so
when we had our meeting last time we
kind of looked at some of the schools
and I think that kind of shocked us into
the idea of 0.75 is probably too high
for compact schools and I appreciate
that you're saying it's probably doable
for an urban school and that's primarily
because for an urban school you're not
having recreation space that's just on
the land other than maybe an interior
gym we're not going to be providing
recreational door space or community why
does the city not want to define the
recreational spaces part of the square
footage there was the thought process
behind that we have never counted
parking as part of the FAA so we just
well it just seemed to be you know it's
an open space so we wouldn't so I've got
an idea I think if the if the open space
is for public use the kind of space that
like when school is not in session
people gonna run on the track I think it
makes sense to exclude that from the
fire calculation is in that case with
what it really is is it's it's no
different than if there was a city-owned
park that then the school was using
during school sessions just school owns
it and then when schools not in session
the public's using it so I think as a
potentially nice carrot to incentivize
the school to build soccer fields and
baseball fields that then can be used by
public outside of school usage and I
think it would make I think as a
suggestion modifying this so it's 0.75
but excluding recreational space I think
there's still mayor
to having things like parking Farrington
advised to school to keep that stuff
compressed but I think for recreational
space I think if the school is creating
what's effectively open space I mean it
might be you know some some some seating
or some lighting but it's otherwise it's
open space I think that's that's there's
value to even in a combat environment
there's value to creating that green
space in commercial and residential
world not counting the structured
parking space is an incentive to them
mm-hmm
Russ something that would be an
incentive to put more of the parking
into structured space more more than 50%
more than the requirement well I'm just
saying if you're trying to meet in FA
are and you're not going to count it
there's no incentive to go higher if it
does count against an FA are it could be
that's not saying that we would because
I recall that when we talked about
structured parking it was 25% and I was
surprised to see that it got rid of 50
I think the 50 is only for urban correct
no T's for compact schools because
that's all we have now that's the only
regs we have now yeah right and even
that seemed as he was looking back at it
to be awfully high just a side note
though that should be a minimum of 50
percent not just went into the last
amendments that you'll see on 15th since
we're not looking to make decisions on
this right now similar to how you guys
presented some of the existing schools
and communicate with the farlows and it
could be really interesting to show that
same analysis and subtract out the
recreational space yeah hey these are
the FAR's with and without and just see
how much that moves the needle and then
might give us really good data point to
figure out where than our 0.75 is good
ain't that bad Leroy oh yeah yeah
because if you can point say hey yeah
the talus site the new high school site
if you exclude recreation or space we're
landing at like one point to work then
whatever it might say okay so 0.75 seems
reasonable especially if that moves the
needle from some
the earlier sites that you built that
maybe are a little bit more spread out
if we look at the FA are on that and go
oh it only achieved 0.5 even when we
take the recreational space out and the
newer ones are going more toward that
1.2 idea that shows us progress that
meets this idea of good use of the land
and compact sighting and all of that
that we're looking for well just as a
rough example on the high school
elementary site to me to 0.75 FA are
we'd have to build four high schools and
four elementary schools on that site
absolutely got the money for that
because I'll take that fantastic
do you know ballpark that if you exclude
the recreational space what the far
would be or do you have to say yeah and
you'd also have to look at usable land
versus the whole site as well I was just
taking the gross acreage times 0.75 and
I forget how much by the three hundred
and forty thousand square feet of
building that we're gonna put there yeah
it is still a pretty significant area
yeah so does this come back for us okay
the the policies and the two definitions
will come back on the 13th of December
amidst your whole comprehensive plan
amendments well I'll come back on that
day remember we postponed we bumped it
so that we can have this discussion but
they will all come back to you in
December for that public hearing your
next two meetings in November are both
public hearings on that November 8th is
a public hearing of the level three
review and central and Emily will be in
charge of that public hearing that
should be a fascinating night don't miss
it a joint meeting yes the beginning
part of it will be the Gilman corridor
open house with the Development
Commission and we've also invited the
Development Commission to stay for the
public hearing on level 3 review because
it affects them because they're the ones
that do the level 3 which is which and I
was then
at the 8th of November here at 6:30 and
then the 15th which is the next week so
you don't have to mean that Thanksgiving
that's when we're gonna look at not
municipal facilities anymore
institutional what did we change it to
institutional buildings institutional
facilities that's when we'll have the
continuation of that meeting yes and
occurring over and we'll try and make
sure the computers work this time only
get institutional facilities worries me
it was municipal but it didn't fit all
the things in the categories we wanted
to probably I didn't like that word as
well either have a different word I'm
open the point was we the things that
we're discussing here and particularly
the areas that are kind of still open
which is this conversation on FA RS and
what those spaces they need to get that
information back to you so that you can
pull that together right sorry for the
confusion we would not be doing urban
regulations next time that was to kick
off next year's work on that urban
regulations while we were talking about
policies and the definitions we thought
we should launch that conversation but
that those regulations won't be coming
back in December but we hope they'll
come back early next year now that we've
started to talk about it I still want to
provide that FA our information Thanks
right because all the schools are in the
information you wanted for municipal
facilities we did all those and it's an
eye-opener but the affair but then like
you said we never required it before so
they you know we never had to work
towards that but when are you disturbing
those that report it would be a week
before the meeting so hopefully on the
8th they will be in the mail for the
15th
any any other questions or thoughts hmm
did you guys respond to the carrot part
of my suggestion that the recreation
space would only be excluded from the
VAR calculation if it had some sort of
public access component do you guys have
any objection to that that's
unreasonable no because all of our yield
areas are utilized by the key Wow
shortage
super anything else anything else you
want to bring up just gonna be here the
8th I think so I'm still in this
commission right yes okay because we did
hire a staff person for it but that was
I haven't heard any more okay so that
really is four of us okay excellent
now if there's nothing for the good of
the order I'm gonna call the meeting at
8:45 well don't you
thanks Steve thanks I think
you