← Back to City Council Digest

City Council Planning, Development & Environment Committee Auto captions

Tuesday, October 1, 2024

6:30 PM · Council Chambers, 135 E. Sunset Way, Issaquah WA
Topic tracked across meetings:
Comprehensive Plan Periodic Update Draft Review COM 0017 3/3
3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
3a
Minutes of September 9, 2024
packet pp.5–6
Staff report:
APPROVAL OF MINUTES a) 09-09-24 City Council Planning, Development & Environment Committee Minutes Page (0000)
4. AGENDA ITEMS
4a
Comprehensive Plan Periodic Update Draft Review COM 0017
60 min · Stephen Padua, Long Range Planning Manager · packet pp.7–751
Topics: Land Use
Staff report:
The draft Comprehensive Plan Periodic Update was presented to the PDE on September 9, 2024. The committee was asked to review the amendments and provide comments and recommendations not yet discussed by the Planning Policy Commission. The PDE requested: 1) Introduction additions to include where we were, where we are, and where we are going, highlights of the cities dedication to the environment, and inclusion of the 1993 values, and 2) directly address the Affordable Housing Committee recommendations.
0:10 good evening welcome everyone to the
0:12 city council isqua city council Planning
0:14 Development and environment committee um
0:16 today is October 1st and this is uh I am
0:21 council member hunt and this is council
0:23 president Walsh and council member Hall
0:24 who are the regular members of this
0:27 committee tonight we have one regular
0:31 business item and before that we will
0:34 start with public comments I do have
0:35 some um uh guidance to read if we have
0:40 any members of the public online that
0:42 might wish to make a comment there are
0:44 no virtual attendees at this time chair
0:46 okay thank you and I will note for the
0:48 record that there are no members of the
0:49 public wishing to make comment um in
0:52 council chambers this evening and also
0:54 as a reminder at any time you can write
0:57 written comments to us at city council
0:59 at is
1:01 ww.gov um the first item of business
1:04 then is approval of the minutes these
1:06 are the minutes of the September 9th
1:08 20124 meeting of this committee um do we
1:11 have any corrections or comments on
1:15 those okay we do not then um please say
1:19 I if you approve of those minutes I I I
1:23 all
1:24 right oh sorry about
1:30 all right thank you council member Hall
1:33 um then we will move right into our
1:34 first agenda item which is Comm 0017
1:37 comprehensive plan periodic update draft
1:39 review and this will be presented by
1:42 Steven peda welcome
1:44 Stephen thank you chair hunt give me one
1:49 moment okay I have the presentation up
1:51 are you able to see the presentation on
1:53 your screen okay yes uh there is a gray
1:57 box over part of it
2:03 strange okay let's try that
2:14 again are you trying to share the
2:16 application or the window the full
2:19 screen the application itself okay if
2:21 you try sharing the full screen that
2:24 usually keeps that from happening
2:33 all right we're gonna we're going to
2:35 roll with
2:39 this all right so tonight we are here to
2:42 provide an overview of the proposed
2:43 changes for the periodic update of the
2:45 comprehensive plan and other committee
2:48 feedback uh the direction needed for
2:50 tonight is to get feedback on the latest
2:52 changes to the comprehens plan ask for
2:55 any additional changes from the
2:56 committee and then um ask for direction
3:01 on recommendation to the full city
3:03 council when city council reviews this
3:07 November just a quick background uh you
3:10 all have seen this several times um but
3:13 for tonight's presentation I want to
3:15 provide a quick background for the
3:16 comprehensive plan perc update the
3:19 majority scope for this perc update was
3:21 focused on compliance with State
3:24 Regional and countywide
3:26 regulations um like many of the cities
3:29 around us there are changes to land use
3:32 housing um as several as the many of the
3:35 other elements especially with the new
3:37 environmental element that was
3:39 incorporated with this periodate that we
3:41 needed to comply with and so many of the
3:43 changes in tonight's packet reflect many
3:45 of the what is required of us from the
3:48 state region
3:50 and a summary of the changes includes
3:54 the state requirements compliance with
3:56 many of the state requirements as well
3:58 as the regional and County incorporation
4:00 of diversity equity and inclusion uh
4:03 throughout all of the elements goals
4:06 policies as well as the
4:08 narrative the integration and
4:10 coordination of functional plan language
4:12 into the comprehensive plan the
4:15 establishment of
4:17 neighborhoods creating a new environment
4:20 and climate stewardship
4:22 element and then the rezone of City Hall
4:26 northwest's property
4:29 since the committee met on September 9th
4:31 to review the conference plan packet
4:34 there were a few changes at the request
4:36 of the committee the first being an
4:38 introduction uh we incorporated new
4:41 additional context on the past present
4:43 as well as the future for the city we
4:46 highlighted much of the dedication of
4:48 the city to the natural environment as
4:50 well as included the 1993 values in the
4:53 introduction we
4:54 also um per the committee's request we
4:58 directly address the recommendations
5:00 from the affordable housing
5:01 committee and um additional to what the
5:05 committee requested we received final
5:07 comments from the Department of Commerce
5:09 on several Elements which have been
5:11 incorporated into the draft elements for
5:13 tonight's
5:14 packet and all those are identified
5:16 throughout the Matrix
5:22 changes so directly for the affordable
5:24 housing committee recommendations the
5:26 first recommendation was specifically to
5:28 prioritize 0 to 30 % Ami housing so
5:32 staff have made the change to directly
5:35 address that comment from the affordable
5:37 housing committee
5:41 staff the second recommendation was to
5:44 include inventor analysis components
5:47 that were either missing or not found in
5:49 the draft elements so what were not
5:52 found in the elements we highlighted for
5:54 the affordable housing committee staff
5:55 and what was missing have been
5:56 incorporated into the draft materials
6:01 for the third and fourth recommendation
6:03 from the affordable housing committee um
6:05 they're primarily focused on
6:06 implementation so we plan to address
6:09 these in the next update of the housing
6:11 strategy work
6:16 plan and for the final recommendation
6:18 from the affordable housing committee
6:20 was to address Transit as well and
6:22 affordable housing and so staff are
6:25 proposing policies A4 and A5 expand the
6:29 the supply and range of housing types
6:31 including affordable units at density
6:33 sufficient to maximize the benefits of
6:35 Transit Investments throughout the city
6:38 and support the development and
6:39 preservation of income restricted
6:41 affordable housing that is within
6:43 walking distance to plan high capacity
6:45 and frequent Transit and both of these
6:47 are Incorporated in the draft housing
6:52 element in addition to those changes um
6:57 in preparation for tonight's meeting we
6:58 found some typos in the draft Matrix so
7:00 we wanted to highlight for you uh those
7:04 these minor updates in the draft Matrix
7:06 are in were updated with tonight's
7:08 packet but because it was so last minute
7:10 we wanted to make sure to highlight
7:11 where those changes
7:18 were so after the committee met on
7:21 September 9th the planning policy
7:23 commission met to for to form their
7:26 recommendation to city council for the
7:28 comprehensive Plan update
7:30 the com uh commission approved three
7:35 changes first was to add additional
7:38 discussions into the land use and
7:39 sustainability element second was to
7:42 make some edits to land use policy
7:45 B6 and the last is to add a policy to
7:49 the environment and climate stewardship
7:51 element to address environmental Equity
7:54 or environmental
7:57 justice and that new policy to to um to
8:00 address environmental justice is policy
8:02 J2 ensure all community members
8:05 regardless of race social or economic
8:07 status have a clean and healthy
8:09 environment identify mitigate and
8:11 correct for unavoidable negative impacts
8:13 of public actions that dis
8:15 disproportionately affect Frontline
8:17 communities and a lot of this language
8:19 is based on guidance from the state and
8:21 County on how to address environmental
8:22 justice and
8:26 comp in addition to the changes the the
8:29 Planning Commission recommended from
8:31 city council um two specific requests
8:34 the first is asking Council to pay
8:36 attention to introduction backgrounds
8:37 and discussions the commission felt that
8:40 they spent a lot of time on goals and
8:42 policies but not a lot of time on
8:45 introduction backgrounds and discussions
8:47 so part of the recommendation was
8:49 primarily focused on goals and policies
8:52 more so than the narrative components of
8:54 the
8:54 element the second request from planning
8:57 policy commission was to consider
8:59 economic Vitality policy A1 to split
9:03 this into two
9:04 policies um the reason why this is a
9:06 request instead of a recommendation from
9:08 planning policy commission is because uh
9:11 staff reminded the commission that this
9:13 was actually a major change from
9:16 Regional
9:17 staff um to comply with vision 2050
9:20 policies which is to provide services to
9:22 business
9:23 businesses with intentional focus on
9:25 businesses that are small local
9:26 historically lack Capital represent
9:28 under underserved communities and are at
9:31 risk of displacement and so that was
9:34 actually directly addressing Vision 2050
9:39 policies next steps for the conference
9:41 plan is to go to the committee of the
9:43 whole on November
9:45 18 and then it'll go to full city
9:48 council for tenative adoption on
9:49 December
9:52 2nd again the direction we needed
9:54 tonight is to get any additional changes
9:58 or uh feedback on the latest changes to
10:00 the comp
10:02 plan ask for any additional changes to
10:04 the conference plan from the
10:06 committee and to discuss a
10:08 recommendation for full city council
10:10 review and the administration recommends
10:13 approval of the 2024 comence plan perod
10:18 amendment that concludes my presentation
10:26 tonight right thank you
10:29 we have any questions at this time
10:31 council member Hall thank you I have two
10:35 and first let me just start off by
10:36 thanking Dr Dolly wall and Stephen in
10:38 particular for meeting with me earlier
10:39 this week to help guide me through the
10:42 redline versions that was very helpful
10:43 as I as I studied for tonight um two
10:46 questions first on kind of the
10:48 discussion session sections generally um
10:52 so um at the request of PPC um albe it
10:56 was interesting because it was most of
10:58 the reading of the conf plan um I went
11:00 through the intro and the discussions in
11:02 the background and noticed that there
11:04 are some um elements where there are
11:09 no very few I'd say most of like the
11:11 really major elements have mey
11:13 discussions that I thought were great
11:15 and then there are some that don't and
11:17 then there are some elements that like
11:18 one or two of the sections don't have
11:20 discussion so I was just wondering if
11:21 you could touch on kind of how how you
11:23 came up with what section needs
11:25 discussions sure so um a lot of those
11:29 elements that didn't include discussions
11:31 as as a intro to explain some of the
11:34 goals and policies we had discussions
11:37 with those um respective staff and their
11:40 boards commissions and they felt that
11:42 any additional language that we were
11:43 adding was more redundant and repeating
11:46 the language that was already explained
11:48 within the goals and policies or it was
11:50 language that's already represented in
11:52 the functional plans as part of
11:54 implementation so we just couldn't find
11:56 a middle ground and in agreement with
11:59 the staff and the boards of
12:00 Commissioners they felt like no
12:01 discussion just made the most sense for
12:03 those goals and
12:07 policies okay that
12:09 makes and actually now that you
12:11 mentioned I remember you saying that to
12:13 me about the Human Services element in
12:15 particular that a lot of that was that's
12:17 correct um second question about the um
12:22 economic
12:24 Vitality policy A1 the particular policy
12:27 they wanted us to take up um so they're
12:31 they're seeing PBC is seeing this
12:33 distinction of kind of two potential
12:35 policies within there but I wanted to
12:37 ask you if it lives as it is now or if
12:40 it lives as two separate
12:42 policies
12:43 um we wouldn't be
12:46 interpreting Economic Development or
12:48 customer service or business assistance
12:50 policy in any different way right I mean
12:52 it would be we would be implementing
12:55 policy in identical ways whether it was
12:57 one policy or two policies is that right
12:59 correct so even if we were to split it
13:02 off um into two policies to address the
13:06 comments made by Regional staff we would
13:08 actually have to have almost similar
13:10 language added back into the first
13:14 half okay thank
13:22 you okay thank you um the first question
13:27 I had uh I was mostly
13:30 looking through or most closely looking
13:32 through the Matrix of changes um 1993
13:36 doesn't show up so could you explain
13:39 more about how the
13:41 1983 um Community Values as was
13:44 mentioned how that's Incorporated and
13:47 how somebody would go about seeing what
13:49 was changed to reflect that so with the
13:52 1993 values we list them all out as they
13:55 are written um from the original
13:57 comprehensive plan
13:59 and at the end of the introduction um
14:02 which is also how it is introduced in
14:04 the original comprehensive plan what we
14:06 changed was identifying the relative
14:10 goals that
14:13 were implementing those values primarily
14:16 because it was actually repeating a lot
14:18 of the language that those values were
14:19 spelling out so all the goals we were
14:21 going to identify were basically going
14:23 to say the same thing of the values
14:26 which is why we presented the those
14:29 values as they are in the introduction
14:36 now I can pull it up really quick if
14:39 that helps chair
14:41 hun uh yeah that'd be great I'm I'm
14:43 looking at it I think it' be good got it
14:46 together
15:27 okay so these are all the values from
15:31 1993 that were listed in the original
15:33 comprehensive plan when we originally
15:36 they were listed as two columns in the
15:38 original table with the values on the
15:40 left and the Rel relative goals on the
15:43 right when we started to do that for
15:45 this draft comprehensive plan we found
15:47 that we were actually repeating the same
15:49 language like those those values are
15:52 actually spelled out directly in the
15:53 goals which felt redundant and so we
15:56 felt like not listing all those goals
15:59 and just listing all the values Together
16:01 made more sense for the readability of
16:03 the
16:10 document okay so the the difference
16:13 in these were in the previous version
16:16 and in this update they are being sort
16:19 of separated from the associated goals
16:21 because the goals were redundant to
16:25 these
16:26 values we were
16:31 the goals had the same language and so
16:33 if uh yeah maybe you can pull that out
16:37 how it was shown in the existing comp
16:38 plan basically in the
16:41 existing um you change there was a table
16:45 that had a you know here's your value
16:48 and then it linked all the golden
16:49 policies it was just a table it didn't
16:52 add any value especially at the
16:53 beginning of the document introduction
16:56 you haven't even read the golden
16:57 policies but it was just trying to
16:59 thread here's the value and here's the
17:01 the goals but a lot of those goals were
17:03 getting repeated so a goal would show up
17:06 for Community value a and for B and for
17:10 C so it just became sort of a redundant
17:13 piece uh because it was there was a lot
17:15 of overlap and duplication between the
17:18 values and the goals and the goals were
17:20 showing up in multiple columns um and it
17:23 would have become even longer list if we
17:26 tried to list every goal that tied to
17:29 that
17:31 value um especially at the beginning of
17:33 the the comprehensive plan when you're
17:35 just haven't even read the goals and you
17:38 just list all your goals numbers goal a
17:41 goal B you
17:48 know okay thank you um
17:52 and and the treasures list is an
17:56 attachment to the document separate and
17:59 that's been the same for multiple
18:01 versions now okay okay
18:06 um in
18:08 the in the vision statement um there's
18:13 been a a pretty substantial rewrite um
18:17 the first vision statement that's in the
18:19 Matrix of
18:24 changes
18:26 um yeah it's it's the very first item in
18:29 exhibit B uh and I wondered if you could
18:32 speak to that it seems like there there
18:35 are pretty substantial changes to the
18:38 vision um including introducing this
18:41 idea of balancing economic social and
18:43 environmental considerations and I
18:45 wondered if you could talk to how how we
18:47 got from the previous vision statement
18:49 to the revised draft sure I and I'll ask
18:53 uh senior planner Le to add on to this
18:55 but we had several discussions with the
18:57 planning policy Commission last year on
18:59 the vision statement
19:01 for on the vision statement and and and
19:05 so it ended up being almost full rewrite
19:07 of the vision statement after we
19:08 incorporated all their edits some of the
19:12 pieces that were being discussed was
19:13 balancing each of those major topics
19:15 that are listed in the vision statement
19:18 um a little more equally in the vision
19:21 statement so that was kind of The
19:23 Balancing Act that we had to do with
19:25 planning policy Commission in the
19:26 meetings that we had last year
19:39 sorry yes senior uh Kristen Leon senior
19:42 planner and yeah I think the original
19:44 ask was actually from the planning um
19:46 development and environmental committee
19:48 to ask us to include more of um based on
19:51 public comment I believe as well um
19:53 where have we been where are we now
19:55 where are we going uh so we added those
19:57 pieces in there and uh added just a
20:00 little more more background
20:02 information and PPC love the
20:11 idea okay I think those are my my
20:14 questions did you have any questions no
20:17 okay all right um then I think with that
20:21 there's still no members of the public
20:23 in um for public comments so I'll check
20:25 in if there are any members of the
20:26 public online C CL there are no virtual
20:29 attendees chair okay um then we will
20:32 move into our deliberation and did you
20:34 have specific questions or or really
20:37 just wanting feedback on the draft
20:39 overall I think over the draft overall
20:42 and then
20:44 um discussion for recommendations to the
20:46 full city council okay thank you all
20:49 right who would like to start us
20:52 off council president wsh thank you yeah
20:57 um this is actually a big upgrade in my
21:01 opinion from what we had seen previously
21:04 um I really like the introduction text
21:08 and the you know where we've been where
21:10 we're going um that really draws you
21:13 into the purpose as a regular reader not
21:16 just you know planning staff and council
21:19 members and such um I like the addition
21:22 of the discussions um I feel like that
21:25 again adds to the context that allows
21:28 somebody to really understand what the
21:31 purpose is of the policies that come
21:34 below it um and regards to the specific
21:38 feedback I have no problem with EV
21:40 policy A1 um staying as a combined but I
21:43 would be happy to hear from fellow um
21:46 committee members on that um I'd asked a
21:51 bunch of questions over email and you
21:52 answered all of those so that's great um
21:56 I think the only thing that's kind of
21:59 sticking with me right now is the land
22:02 use introductions use of the word
22:05 character um having been on the
22:07 Strategic plan task force um I know
22:10 there was a lot of community engagement
22:12 around that and wanting to really
22:16 recognize that as a society we are we
22:21 have begun to recognize that the word
22:24 character um was included for not as
22:28 good of reasons and so I'm wondering if
22:32 there is a different way because I think
22:34 we did it fairly well in the Strategic
22:37 Plan update to work around that as a
22:41 concept to recognize that yes there are
22:43 things we want to maintain about our
22:47 community and our land use elements but
22:50 that doesn't hold us to all of the same
22:54 um and doesn't say that change is bad um
22:58 really did appreciate there was one of
23:00 the policies that re really went in and
23:03 recognized that and said we're going to
23:06 maintain what's special about our
23:08 communities but not at the expense of um
23:12 the changes needed for affordable
23:14 housing um so if there is a way that we
23:17 could um adjust the word character so
23:22 that we keep the good parts of
23:26 maintaining our community without also
23:29 dog whistling thank
23:34 you thank you coun
23:37 H sure thank you um good point I had
23:41 thought of that it was in there a couple
23:43 times same with the word um I don't know
23:45 if we feel the same way about the word
23:47 charm but I often kind of get a similar
23:49 response just inside um I feel like in
23:53 the Strategic plan didn't use the word
23:55 aesthetic instead or something like that
23:57 but that just feels feels awkward you'll
23:59 you'll know what to do you'll know
24:00 what's best but
24:02 um all right so yeah having spent the
24:04 last um couple days studying The Matrix
24:06 and the clean and the redlined um copies
24:09 thank you for Prov providing those again
24:11 um genuinely feeling um excellent about
24:14 where we are at the moment um it's
24:16 aligned with our functional plans
24:17 aligned with Council vision and
24:19 Community Vision um and you've made very
24:21 clear throughout the process aligned
24:23 with State and region environments so um
24:26 that I know has been a heavy lift
24:28 appreciate the changes that were made to
24:29 the overall um introduction I think that
24:33 it flows really nice with the additions
24:36 um and also um incorporating changes to
24:39 address the affordable housing
24:40 committee's recommendations as well um I
24:43 appreciate planning policy commission
24:44 going really in depth on the policies
24:47 and their changes there um Council also
24:50 now has had many many touches of amongst
24:53 all three of our committees with the
24:54 different policies same with PPC so I'm
24:57 feeling very good about where sit at the
24:59 moment um and of course like we said at
25:02 the request of PPC um you know we looked
25:04 into intro background discussion
25:06 sections I think they capture the spirit
25:09 of what's needed I think some of them
25:10 are a bit wordy but
25:12 not not so much that I'm going to
25:14 Wordsmith anything they do what they
25:16 need to do right and I think they
25:18 accomplish what they're intended to do
25:19 so um I liked seeing those as well um
25:23 agreed with um council president Walsh
25:26 as for the matter of economic vitality
25:28 uh policy A1 um I think it's fine as one
25:33 um we're going to be implementing policy
25:34 in the exact same way regardless and now
25:36 it sounds like we would have to make a
25:38 change to the original policy anyways
25:40 even if we split it out so I'm fine with
25:43 it staying as one um again good point on
25:47 the use of the word character guess
25:50 let's let's think about um amending that
25:53 and then also this this is nitpicky but
25:55 the 1993 values list one of the we have
25:59 to like tab space on one of them because
26:01 one of the bulleted list ones didn't
26:03 quite carry over so so just check that
26:05 out but again just really good job I
26:07 know many many more staff than just you
26:10 have touched this work so thank thanks
26:11 to them as well and I know we still have
26:13 more Touches at Council before we adopt
26:16 it thanks
26:23 again okay thank you um yes I agree the
26:26 the volunteer commissions that have
26:28 reviewed this have done a great job and
26:31 um I I really appreciate the work that
26:33 they have put in um there is a in the
26:38 1993 values there is a reference to
26:40 character which I also um flagged I
26:43 think that we are trying to move away
26:45 from using that there's other places in
26:48 the document where the word spirit is
26:51 used uh I I don't know I do think we we
26:55 did have this conversation previously
26:57 and we tried to to make sure that we
26:59 were referencing the the physical
27:03 appearance of the buildings the sort of
27:05 aesthetic that kind of thing that's that
27:07 was the intent with our last revisions
27:09 to that um but I do think it it's been
27:12 changed in places and there are a few
27:14 places where it Remains the Same
27:15 including in that 1993 document and
27:18 especially since we're doing an update
27:20 we want to include those values um at a
27:23 high level but we also want to make sure
27:25 that we're using um terminology that is
27:28 appropriate for 2024 so if you can take
27:30 a look at at those that would be great
27:32 also the table of the values it used to
27:35 I don't think that it is meant to um
27:38 have two columns where they correspond
27:41 anymore it's now I think it's just a
27:43 list is that correct so I think you
27:45 could just make it one list instead of
27:47 right now it still kind of looks like
27:48 there's two columns in a
27:51 table
27:53 um I I I did kind of find the linkage
27:56 also in earlier
27:59 um a long time back we used to have
28:01 linkage in our Council um agenda items
28:05 to policies and I did kind of find that
28:07 helpful but I understand how they would
28:08 be kind of repetitive with such high
28:10 level values so I understand that
28:14 change
28:23 um uh on the specific question that was
28:26 asked about splitting the EV policy a
28:30 one into two pieces I agree I think it
28:32 can be I think it can stay the same u in
28:36 stay as one policy I um it is a very
28:40 long sentence though and one thing that
28:43 I uh in reading it just now again um
28:46 wonder about is first of all I think
28:48 that all of the different um categories
28:52 of businesses that we want to have an
28:53 intentional focus on at the end those
28:55 are or instead of and at the end um I I
29:00 think there might be a way to just re
29:02 rewrite it as well to make it more
29:04 readable since it is a very long very
29:07 long sentence as it is but I think it's
29:10 okay as one policy and I kind of like
29:12 having the focus piece within the
29:15 overall policy as
29:24 well one last comment is I
29:29 uh I have a little bit of trouble with
29:32 some of the vagueness if I put myself in
29:37 future Council shoes in terms of
29:39 especially around getting more
29:41 affordable housing where it says you
29:43 know support getting more affordable
29:46 housing or these I think um as a policy
29:49 maker looking to this document in the
29:51 future or our volunteer commissions it
29:54 will be challenging uh to know what
29:56 policies are more specific so if there
29:58 are
29:59 specific um specific things trans
30:03 supporting Transit oriented development
30:04 is in there for example but specific
30:06 policies that uh should be considered by
30:10 Future policy makers that look to this
30:12 plan comprehensive plan for guidance um
30:14 that would be helpful I I think we
30:17 currently have wording in there about
30:20 the need for supporting for example very
30:22 lowincome housing
30:25 and then it's up to Future policy makers
30:28 to decide how to do that um and I think
30:31 it's always helpful to have policy
30:34 examples or specifics in in there that
30:37 would be one additional request um on
30:43 that oh sorry I and I have one last one
30:47 last comment on Creeks to Peaks so
30:49 Creeks to Peaks is replacing green
30:52 necklace as a concept um there's one
30:56 location where it's not directly
30:58 replacing the green necklace um and so I
31:02 wanted to make sure that that's
31:03 consistent and then I also wanted to
31:05 make sure that um is it is it fully
31:08 described or referenced is there a way
31:11 to make sure that it's referencing the
31:12 new Creeks to Peaks plan um in the doc
31:17 throughout the
31:18 document since that I think is still
31:20 under development in the comprehensive
31:22 plan or in the Parks element in the or
31:25 in the comprehensive plan it's we
31:28 debated on providing too much
31:30 description primarily because we wanted
31:33 the set description to be in the park
31:35 system plan rather than the
31:36 comprehensive plan um primarily because
31:38 it is more of an implementation tool for
31:40 the park system plan so um that's kind
31:42 of the balance we we weighed with the
31:44 conference plan versus what how much we
31:46 put into the park system plan so we
31:48 probably didn't provide as much detail
31:50 as what's in the park system plan for
31:52 that
31:54 reason okay but there's still enough to
31:56 know that this is
31:58 the same connectivity between parks that
32:01 was previously represented in the green
32:02 necklace this is the same concept but
32:06 name new
32:08 branding yeah we we tried to describe it
32:10 where it's it's the same but expanded
32:12 concept instead of being it focused on
32:14 just Central isqua it's a now city-wide
32:16 concept okay great
32:20 um then I think I think that just for
32:23 consistency making sure that every time
32:24 green necklace is mentioned it's the
32:26 parks plan as well as the Creeks to
32:28 Peaks elements of the parks plan um and
32:33 then somewhat similarly there's a one
32:35 place where it talks about equal access
32:37 to different um groups and I think
32:39 that's probably Equitable access in the
32:42 in the way that we're thinking about
32:44 different things so just consistency in
32:45 the terminology across those different
32:48 sections which has come a long way but I
32:50 think there's still a few instances of
32:53 that we have any other comments on this
32:56 version council president
32:58 yeah um I wanted to emphasize what I
33:02 heard from both of the council members
33:04 that just
33:06 the word smithing and the adjustments to
33:10 the policies um that we saw throughout
33:14 the um efforts on this whether seeing it
33:17 in the change metrics as something new
33:19 recommended from staff because of a
33:21 state policy or something that was
33:23 really worked on by the boards and
33:26 commissions um I see a lot more of our
33:29 community in this um in the policies in
33:32 the introductions in the dis discussion
33:35 areas and so I I really appreciate the
33:38 adjustments and the long work that has
33:40 gone into this um so just very much
33:45 appreciative of uh what we're coming out
33:47 of with that thank you
33:58 um so we did have one the one specific
34:00 question which was about splitting that
34:01 one policy I think I think we are okay
34:03 with keeping it together did you feel
34:06 differently
34:07 or okay so we will keep we recommend
34:10 just keeping that one together um
34:12 overall we had a few I would say
34:15 relatively minor um requests especially
34:19 on wording and making sure that we're
34:20 using um appropriate terminology for
34:23 example with with character throughout
34:26 um and updating references to earlier
34:29 values like the 1983
34:32 values any other anything else yes go
34:35 ahead well the only other thing that I
34:37 was going to ask you chair hunt was the
34:39 the only thing that seemed like less of
34:41 a minor change was the adding specifics
34:44 part and I was wondering if there was
34:46 any part in particular you were thinking
34:49 like might need more specifics cuz cuz I
34:53 guess my thought had always been comp
34:55 plan lives really high above
34:58 right and is our policy and then our
35:00 functional plans to find those kinds of
35:02 specifics is that is that how staff
35:04 thinks about it do that is that was U
35:07 one of the kind of
35:10 guiding goals for this periodic update
35:13 was to make sure that we kept the
35:14 conference plan kind of that higher
35:16 level um most of the more specific
35:19 information in the conference plan is
35:21 required of us at by the
35:24 state well and there are also times
35:27 where we get so like for example I paid
35:30 like one more in depth in particular in
35:33 the transportation section because I
35:34 think mobility and infrastructure
35:35 committee you probably heard me say a
35:37 lot that well maybe not you but um that
35:40 I wanted to have more micr Mobility
35:43 options described there and so in there
35:46 you say things like micro ability
35:48 includes but it's not limited to and
35:50 then has some examples right do you mean
35:52 for specifics like something like that
35:54 like these like things that could that
35:57 we could do in response to this policy
35:59 include but aren't limit to limited
36:01 to X Y and
36:04 Z yes so um some of I I do think that
36:08 the ones that I was thinking of are
36:11 probably the ones that are related to or
36:15 to comply with the other state and
36:18 County requirements so for example
36:20 there's one that says this is H policy
36:23 C4 it says prioritize the needs of
36:25 extremely low-income households at or
36:27 below 30%
36:30 Ami um and that is to comply with the
36:33 state and County requirement which
36:36 recommended which I recall we actually I
36:38 think spoke about at our last meeting
36:40 that that is the recommendation to make
36:42 sure that you are prioritizing the needs
36:44 of extremely low-income households at
36:46 are below 30% Ami however I just putting
36:49 myself in the future shoes of council or
36:52 you know PBC or volunteer commission
36:54 that looks at
36:55 these what kind of policy
36:58 can we use to prioritize the needs of
37:01 30% um Ami individuals that's a very
37:06 challenging uh it's a it's a big
37:08 challenge for us and a big challenge
37:10 across the region and so to have the
37:12 wording there
37:15 um at such a high level I think it would
37:18 be more helpful to have some examples of
37:21 of the sorts of policies that that
37:24 future policy makers could consider to
37:27 meet that goal for that
37:31 policy but for the committee's
37:33 consideration I mean a lot of the
37:35 implementation components for the
37:37 policies and the comprensive plan
37:40 get they we really dive into those
37:42 examples that you're asking for within
37:44 the functional plans and So within the
37:47 next update for the housing strategy
37:48 work plan I I feel like that's where
37:51 we'll be able to dive into more of how
37:53 do we prioritize 0 to 30% Ami um what
37:57 does that mean for the city of isqua for
38:00 when it comes to implementation what
38:02 what kind of resources do we dedicate
38:03 towards that so that those will be where
38:07 we have a lot more of those detailed
38:10 discussions yeah I I agree with that and
38:14 um and that will be very helpful
38:16 especially
38:17 for for um policies such as the one that
38:21 we're talking about right now at the
38:23 same time there are other policies here
38:26 in the comprehensive plan that do go
38:27 into more detail like you know there's
38:29 one that specifically calls out 6 PDQ
38:32 the um Tire dust pollutant as a water
38:36 quality issue so some go into a lot more
38:38 detail some are very very high level and
38:40 I do think it's related often times to
38:43 them being required at the same time if
38:45 they are required I think for future
38:48 policy makers be helpful to have an
38:50 example or two and actually I do think
38:52 there are probably other examples maybe
38:54 you could combine or you could within
38:56 the document in other policies so you
38:58 could maybe pull out some of the other
39:01 examples about making sure that there
39:03 are you know there's another one about
39:05 working with regional and National um
39:09 work with local Regional and national
39:10 resources to increase public and private
39:12 dollars for um special needs housing you
39:16 know so just making sure that there's
39:19 some guidance to how how what does it
39:22 mean to prioritize those needs sure just
39:26 for clarification are you asking staff
39:28 to take a look at the policy
39:29 specifically for the housing element or
39:30 for all the elements in the
39:31 comprehensive plan for more specific
39:34 examples that one stands out to me as as
39:39 uh one
39:41 that I would have trouble knowing how in
39:45 practice what what it what kind of
39:49 policies would the needs of extremely
39:53 lwi income households at are below 30%
39:54 Ami so that one stands out to me as one
39:57 that it would be good to have an example
40:02 two president wsh yeah um I hear that I
40:09 also hear what staff is saying about we
40:12 really need to do the investigation and
40:14 figure out what's going to work for us
40:18 using a functional plan I also do see
40:24 other um policies in the housing element
40:28 that speak to ways that might accomplish
40:32 that you know policy C6 allow emergency
40:35 housing um reduce barriers and promote
40:38 access um and then offer a variety of
40:42 incentives such as parking building
40:44 Dimensions Etc so I I feel like there is
40:48 a menu of options available in here uh
40:54 whether those are specific on
40:59 that 30% Ami or not I don't know so I I
41:05 would be fine with going into you know
41:08 if we want to come up with some examples
41:11 as long as that's also going to still
41:14 satisfy the affordable housing committee
41:16 um because I know that was one of their
41:19 requirements was hey everybody says
41:22 they're going
41:24 to you know uh accommodate
41:28 under 30% but not necessarily
41:30 prioritized so I think if we say
41:33 prioritized such as a and C that would
41:35 still so uh satisfy the need but I would
41:38 also want to make sure before making
41:40 that
41:50 change well and I I do think we
41:53 can make that change and be consistent
41:55 within the document ment with other
42:01 policies
42:06 okay CC M Hall did you have any further
42:11 comments well yeah I mean I guess just I
42:15 I feel like I'm okay with that
42:17 particular policy if we feel like we
42:20 have um some examples we can pull into
42:23 that
42:24 that um they fulfill the requirements of
42:27 the affordable housing committee
42:28 recommendation I guess I would just
42:30 caution going back through the entire
42:33 comp plan
42:35 um because of where we are already and
42:39 um in that the plan should
42:41 be so that's my only my only thought is
42:44 just
42:45 caution but fine with
42:54 this you have any other comments
42:58 no all right do you have what you need
42:59 from this committee if I could get a
43:00 little more clarification on the last
43:01 one do you does the committee want staff
43:03 to only change the one policy where
43:06 prior prioritize 0 to 30% Ami or look at
43:10 all the policies and add more
43:14 examples yeah I I'm fine with just the
43:16 one
43:20 yeah mhm okay so we'll do the one and
43:25 yeah and it can be probably consistent
43:27 within the document because there are
43:28 other policies that I think lend
43:31 themselves to
43:34 that right okay
43:38 um we have what we need on the
43:41 comprehens plan for the recommendation
43:43 for City Council in terms of the
43:44 materials to provide city
43:47 council um is there any feedback on what
43:51 we should provide some of the feedback
43:52 we already received from the committee
43:53 was to use a lot of the information we
43:55 provided you in the previous um staff
43:58 report provided on September 9th so
44:00 we'll cons we'll include some of the
44:01 information we Prov provided for this
44:03 meeting but use that for the staff
44:05 report but for the draft elements are we
44:09 also providing city council with the
44:11 redline versions that were provided
44:12 tonight or just the clean
44:19 versions president Walsh um I think the
44:23 things that were the most helpful for me
44:25 was The Matrix of changes and the clean
44:30 versions
44:34 but I feel like somebody might ask for
44:36 the redline version so it it might be
44:40 useful to have it you know not
44:43 everything together but um maybe be able
44:46 to provide it as an
44:49 option and the council president members
44:52 of the committee uh perhaps what we can
44:54 do is post it on website separate for
44:57 the packet and make a connection to that
45:01 have a link to that um my sense is that
45:04 given the enormity of this Enterprise uh
45:08 the council is very much going to be
45:09 looking to you the three of you for your
45:11 guidance and are not going to
45:14 necessarily want to dive in because from
45:17 from my hearing of the discussion this
45:18 evening it seems as if the the commit is
45:21 generally settled on the matters I think
45:24 the council's going to want to know that
45:26 and so if we can keep this as
45:27 straightforward as possible um I think
45:30 that'll be to everyone's benefit so
45:32 perhaps we have the complete document uh
45:35 in a final version The Matrix um and
45:39 quite honestly uh chair hunt I think
45:41 some transmittal from you given the
45:43 topic would be useful as well so perhaps
45:46 the staff could take a stab at at
45:49 drafting that's not something we
45:50 normally do but this is one of the large
45:52 I mean compared to redoing our entire
45:55 land use code the comp plan so it's been
45:57 a little bit of a of a of a of a a
46:00 different animal in this community but
46:02 certainly in every other community in
46:03 Washington state this is the major
46:05 policy initiative of the last several
46:08 years so I think that it would be
46:10 appropriate if the chair is comfortable
46:12 with you know having a couple of
46:14 comments and writing um then of course
46:17 you know making some presentation prior
46:20 to this being on the regular agenda I
46:23 won't even ask you if this is going on
46:25 that but um I think that would be
46:30 appropriate okay so we have we're
46:35 recommending The Matrix of changes and
46:38 the clean
46:39 version we can link to this packet which
46:42 has all of the redlined versions and say
46:45 these were made available and other
46:49 Council yeah the full Council can then
46:52 look to this packet with all of the
46:54 redline versions if they would like we
46:57 can say that we we had those to review
47:00 in this meeting um and then there will
47:03 be a a letter from me with our process
47:08 that we've done to review it um to the
47:10 council that sound and any other you
47:13 know final thoughts I think on this you
47:16 have you have talked a lot this evening
47:19 um about some of the broad themes um
47:22 here this evening more than real
47:24 specific policies so I don't know if
47:25 that's something you want to focus on
47:27 how those compare uh to the previous
47:30 version of the comprehensive plan
47:32 because there have been some changes as
47:33 you talked about um I think members of
47:36 the community have been focused on that
47:38 so not unlikely that the council would
47:40 hear that so it would be good to I think
47:43 have the committee's explanation up
47:45 front how you dealt with those
47:49 issues okay great um so we can talk
47:53 about then the history of the of the
47:57 document and you know there are some
47:59 changes that were made because they are
48:02 required by law from either the state or
48:05 the county there are some that are made
48:08 that were made in response to having new
48:11 functional plans or new plans um and new
48:15 boards since the last time this was
48:18 updated um there's a emphasis for
48:21 example on Equity um which has been
48:24 informed by Community conversations
48:27 um and then we can talk about some of
48:30 the things that we discussed today
48:33 including updating the terminology and
48:35 making the terminology consistent as far
48:37 as the use of the word character um and
48:41 words are important and so just making
48:42 sure that we reflect on those updates as
48:45 well and why those changes have been
48:50 made and then consistency with with our
48:52 other plans there anything else that we
48:55 would like to
48:57 highlight for the full
49:00 Council yes go
49:02 ahead um I know one thing that kind of
49:06 has been circling around all of this is
49:09 some of the future updates that we will
49:12 need to be making to our land use code
49:15 related to um
49:19 1110 um and so recognizing that within
49:25 our um um our current zoning we have the
49:29 capacity to handle the housing that
49:32 would be the other thing is the housing
49:35 um numbers that have targets that have
49:38 been handed down from the county this
49:41 year have the Ami adjustments and so we
49:44 had to make the adjustments within the
49:47 comprehensive plan but recognizing that
49:50 there is still future work to accomplish
49:54 some of those areas and what that
49:57 those next steps are after um the
50:00 comprehensive plan to bring everything
50:02 into code and fully satisfy the state
50:04 laws I think would be another addition
50:07 just to recognize that we're not
50:09 ignoring that concept we just have a
50:13 future process that's also going to
50:14 accomplish
50:17 that okay I think that's that's great um
50:22 I also think potentially the title 18
50:25 whiteboard items that so that we don't
50:29 lose track of that or don't seem to have
50:31 lost track of that that could also fit
50:33 into the future items or where those are
50:35 in the
50:36 process in the transmitt to
50:41 council okay one clarifying question
50:44 from staff is um the letter from the
50:47 committee is this an additional
50:49 attachment in the packet or is this
50:51 comments that we're providing to the
50:53 chair it is an additional attachment
50:56 okay thank
51:00 you anything else that we would like to
51:02 cover in the in the letter sorry did I
51:14 miss last staff question um the
51:17 environmental board provided a letter to
51:19 to planning policy commission um also to
51:21 city council are we including that as an
51:23 additional attachment for this packet or
51:25 linking it
51:27 I believe that that was a request that
51:28 it be in the final packet and so I think
51:32 that is appropriate to include as well
51:34 okay thank you so we'll include the
51:36 public comment
51:40 Matrix we should probably in I would
51:44 think okay so we're including public
51:47 comment Matrix um environmental board
51:50 letter Matrix of changes clean version r
51:55 letter
52:04 and it provides legislative history I
52:05 mean this Council especially the three
52:07 of you on the Das I think have been very
52:09 consistent on wanting to have a document
52:11 of History legislative history and how
52:13 you get to big decisions so I think that
52:16 what you've described will help future
52:18 policy makers if they
52:21 Wonder yes great and I think and the
52:23 future work is also helpful for for that
52:26 purpose so yes very good point um
52:30 anything
52:31 else you have what you need from us on
52:35 need a
52:36 motion we have I I actually have one
52:39 more clarifying question if you don't
52:40 mind um we have talked about the
52:43 prioritization question before when we
52:45 brought this housing element here um and
52:48 exactly what prioritizing is um but I
52:51 want to know if if I put in there
52:53 something like or if we put in there you
52:55 know prioritize
52:57 how you know housing at 30% Ami using
53:00 simply programs through programs
53:02 regulations and funding is that enough
53:04 or would you like uh programs through
53:07 her human services that provide services
53:09 to do you want more specificity in that
53:13 funding through Arch or through the iHip
53:23 or my feeling is that more specificity
53:26 is more helpful if
53:30 possible some
53:32 more okay thank
53:38 you so Madam CH I for thetion on the
53:42 pack in the packet but uh I don't
53:44 believe there is is there I was just
53:47 checking the okay but we would need the
53:50 the C the committee to recommend to the
53:52 full Council approval of all the
53:55 proposed comprehensive plan amendments
53:57 because not only the
53:59 the not sure what we call the master
54:02 document but there's also City Hall
54:05 Northwest the other there's a couple of
54:06 other on plan that correct or we just
54:10 we're just acting on the the main
54:12 revision
54:28 that's was there was there a motion from
54:32 them one moment
54:45 please City administrator would you like
54:47 a recess to to have the motion
54:52 okay Cofe or tea
54:58 what are you
55:00 drinking what what
55:43 this is the motion that we provided to
55:44 the planning policy
55:46 commission is there a need to add
55:48 something like including adjustments
55:51 that were discussed at October 1st
55:56 me do you include well I think the only
56:00 adjustments um that are going to be
56:02 added that aren't in presented tonight
56:04 or is what was discussed with the minor
56:06 tweaks to do the policy they now become
56:10 your
56:11 correct they have left planning policy
56:14 now these are amendments as presented
56:16 from the committee not from from the
56:18 council
56:27 I I understand the concern though so um
56:30 would it be appropriate to say move to
56:31 recommend approval of the 2024
56:33 comprehensive plan amendments as
56:35 discussed this
56:38 evening yes okay that meet the
56:43 intent it's not right the the issue is
56:45 that it's not exactly as presented um
56:49 this evening we did have a couple
56:58 okay I move to recommend the approval of
57:00 the 2024 comprehensive plan amendments
57:02 as discussed this evening all those in
57:05 favor please say I I I that passes
57:11 unanimously all right chair if I can
57:14 just recognize Stephen um outstanding
57:18 job uh Kristen um mini um planning
57:23 team again this is a major major
57:26 undertaking in all communities it has
57:29 been less of a major undertaking at
57:31 least on the surface because of the tile
57:33 18 work but certainly all the work
57:35 behind the scenes with planning policy
57:37 commission um is really been out to
57:41 thank the planning team for their
57:43 excellent work and the has made uh the
57:46 process very straightforward I think
57:47 we've had lots of uh involvement from
57:51 Partners the environment board other
57:54 boards and commissions so that you see
57:56 no one here this evening and no one
57:58 online I think really is a testament to
58:00 uh the you know being very forthright
58:03 and getting that but from our Community
58:06 Partners so thank you planning
58:10 staff yes thank you all for all the work
58:13 that went into
58:15 this do we have any
58:19 announcements right that was our only
58:21 item of regular business for this
58:23 committee then so there being no further
58:26 business this committee is adjourned at
58:28 7:29 p.m. thank you all good evening