City Council Special Meeting · Monday, May 14, 2018 · City Council Digest

3745 segments .txt ↗

0:16 ↗ good evening and welcome to the Monday

0:18 ↗ May 14th

0:19 ↗ misuk was City Council committee work

0:22 ↗ session and council members are sorry

0:26 ↗ councils deputy president Vitesse

0:29 ↗ councilmembers winter Stein and council

0:31 ↗ member Ramos are excused this evening we

0:34 ↗ will start with ID 0 to 36 our strategic

0:40 ↗ plan with our own Jeff waddling arts

0:43 ↗ director all right thank you good

0:44 ↗ evening

0:45 ↗ excited to be here tonight excited to

0:49 ↗ walk through the the draft park

0:51 ↗ strategic plan we've had it out in the

0:54 ↗ community for about three weeks now

0:55 ↗ hopefully you've had a chance to to look

0:57 ↗ at it I know I've had a chance to talk

0:59 ↗ with a couple of you but really looking

1:01 ↗ forward to again walking you through

1:03 ↗ this and getting some of your feedback

1:05 ↗ comments questions hearing your

1:07 ↗ discussion as we begin to position this

1:11 ↗ for future adoption so what I hope to do

1:16 ↗ tonight is utilizing

1:20 ↗ both some of the pages of the PARCC plan

1:22 ↗ itself and some of the storyboards we

1:25 ↗ did some visuals that helped us as we

1:27 ↗ went back out to the public to talk

1:29 ↗ through this plan so using some of those

1:30 ↗ visuals walk through the plan but I

1:33 ↗ thought I'd start first with where we

1:35 ↗ started and that was as we launched into

1:39 ↗ this endeavor we were aware of some

1:41 ↗ really important goals and goals that

1:44 ↗ came from you as counsel goals we were

1:46 ↗ hearing from the community that really

1:49 ↗ came on the heels of the prior PARCC

1:51 ↗ plan and some of those goals that really

1:53 ↗ drove this was engagement it was

1:56 ↗ important to hear the voices that this

1:58 ↗ plan was very much informed and needed

2:01 ↗ to be informed by the community and the

2:02 ↗ voices of the community it's a plan that

2:05 ↗ really sought and needed to provide that

2:08 ↗ big picture that to provide a vision for

2:11 ↗ our parks our trails our open space

2:14 ↗ system to look at it comprehensively as

2:17 ↗ opposed to element by element

2:20 ↗ another one was really a goal that this

2:23 ↗ be an actionable plan this be something

2:25 ↗ that's usable something that as we

2:28 ↗ identify this as we adopt it it can lead

2:31 ↗ us it can inform us it can inform other

2:33 ↗ planning efforts and it can also be a

2:36 ↗ tool as those new great ideas come in as

2:41 ↗ they often do so I think this draft

2:44 ↗ really meets those goals I'm hoping to

2:47 ↗ go over this overview in about 15

2:50 ↗ minutes and then open it up for

2:51 ↗ discussion and conversation before I

2:54 ↗ jump too far in though I'd want to do

2:55 ↗ some introductions

2:56 ↗ Jennifer Fink who's been my cohort in

3:00 ↗ this as we've as as we've gone through

3:02 ↗ this Greg Brower

3:04 ↗ from Burger partnership is here sort of

3:07 ↗ the lead of our consultant team that

3:09 ↗ really aided and supported us

3:13 ↗ Brad booked our Park Board Chair the

3:16 ↗ park board has served as our oh and

3:19 ↗ Linda from the park board vice-chair the

3:22 ↗ park board really served as a steering

3:24 ↗ committee throughout this whole effort

3:26 ↗ as you see that I I go through this so

3:28 ↗ with that let's jump in so these next

3:33 ↗ two slides represent pages 12 and 13 of

3:35 ↗ the plan I wanted to highlight them just

3:39 ↗ because the process itself the timeline

3:41 ↗ I think really maps out the community

3:44 ↗ voices that that we really sought and

3:47 ↗ looked for throughout this process both

3:50 ↗ in terms of an initial outreach but then

3:52 ↗ check-ins and also through this timeline

3:55 ↗ the frequency and the amount of work

3:57 ↗ that the Park Board did is that steering

3:59 ↗ committee whether it was looking at

4:03 ↗ engagement strategies in March whether

4:05 ↗ it was the park board retreat we had in

4:07 ↗ August that really took the feedback and

4:09 ↗ started to align strategic projects all

4:12 ↗ the way through this process I'd also

4:14 ↗ point out in early January you'll see

4:18 ↗ and you'll recall we saw this

4:21 ↗ opportunity as this plan was reaching

4:23 ↗ its fruition central Issaquah visions

4:26 ↗ was doing its work in January we

4:28 ↗ initiated and really saw that

4:31 ↗ opportunity with the green necklace

4:33 ↗ in the parks department and the

4:37 ↗ consultant team taking a little deeper

4:39 ↗ dive into the green necklace and

4:41 ↗ bringing some some clarity and some

4:43 ↗ unity for that vision but also how

4:46 ↗ central Issaquah and the central

4:48 ↗ Issaquah plan and the part plan can have

4:51 ↗ a bridge that necklace can can serve as

4:54 ↗ a bridge between those two documents

4:57 ↗ I'll touch on the green necklace a

4:59 ↗ little bit later in the in this

5:01 ↗ presentation this represents the tail

5:05 ↗ end of that timeline so our artwork out

5:08 ↗ it squawk Valley Park so phase one

5:13 ↗ engagement we really began like many

5:16 ↗ strategic efforts begin really asking

5:19 ↗ and having aspirational conversations

5:22 ↗ with our residents aspirational meaning

5:24 ↗ what are your hopes dreams and fears for

5:26 ↗ the park system what's working well

5:28 ↗ what's not working well how do we take

5:31 ↗ that honest look in the mirror and asks

5:32 ↗ our community how the how the system is

5:36 ↗ supporting and serving them we had a

5:38 ↗ chance last August to update you in a

5:40 ↗ work session from that public engagement

5:43 ↗ and some of the the guiding principles

5:46 ↗ that began to take shape there are seven

5:48 ↗ guiding principles that you'll see in

5:50 ↗ these bullets that really began to guide

5:52 ↗ and shape the work that came after it

5:55 ↗ those those guiding principles were

5:57 ↗ community active lifestyles safety and

6:00 ↗ health nature and the environment access

6:04 ↗ and connectivity facilities and

6:06 ↗ maintenance looking at the long term and

6:08 ↗ administration overall administration of

6:11 ↗ the system what the what the community

6:15 ↗ told us in phase one engagement was

6:17 ↗ there are many many opportunities within

6:20 ↗ the system there was a lot of potential

6:22 ↗ within the system that they wanted to

6:24 ↗ see come out there was a real desire for

6:29 ↗ connectivity there was a real desire and

6:32 ↗ interest in how we might modernize our

6:34 ↗ system and some of our the active areas

6:37 ↗ of our system so that they can better

6:38 ↗ function and better serve the community

6:41 ↗ another element that began to come out

6:45 ↗ of

6:46 ↗ that phase one engagement that really

6:47 ↗ carried through this whole document and

6:49 ↗ quite frankly also carried through our

6:51 ↗ green necklace work was and it's

6:52 ↗ represented in the map below it's this

6:55 ↗ idea of we have this city that is so

6:59 ↗ blessed with public lands all around us

7:01 ↗ we also have a city that most of our

7:04 ↗ current residents live along the the

7:07 ↗ edges of the city and we have this

7:09 ↗ circle in the middle central Issaquah

7:12 ↗ that we are in the midst of really

7:14 ↗ trying to position for redevelopment so

7:16 ↗ this idea of these three concentric

7:19 ↗ circles if you squint and kind of think

7:20 ↗ of them as circles we have these three

7:22 ↗ concentric circles that really our

7:25 ↗ public system our public parks trails an

7:27 ↗ open space system has an opportunity to

7:29 ↗ connect and unify and support through

7:32 ↗ all three of those and so that really

7:35 ↗ began to resonate in our thinking and

7:37 ↗ our work and like I said carried through

7:41 ↗ carried through this effort so phase two

7:45 ↗ engagement took place last fall and

7:48 ↗ after we did a lot of work a lot of

7:51 ↗ evaluation a lot of assessment began to

7:55 ↗ put together and bring together some

7:58 ↗ strategic projects we went back out to

8:00 ↗ the community in the fall and really

8:02 ↗ wanted to hear back from them and really

8:04 ↗ ask hey did we hear you correctly

8:06 ↗ in phase one engagement we took those

8:11 ↗ projects and began to ask some questions

8:13 ↗ for our residents to prioritize those

8:15 ↗ projects to help inform that work we

8:20 ↗ also had a budget allocation question

8:22 ↗ that one of the tables in the park plan

8:25 ↗ really reflects some of the feedback we

8:28 ↗ got in that question we asked residents

8:32 ↗ how would they invest an imaginary

8:35 ↗ hundred hundred dollars hundred park

8:37 ↗ bucks

8:38 ↗ how would you proportionately invest

8:40 ↗ those hundred dollars over these five

8:42 ↗ general categories of investment into

8:46 ↗ our park system and those five were

8:48 ↗ acquisitions and preservation of natural

8:52 ↗ areas and open space additional athletic

8:55 ↗ field capacity connectivity

8:59 ↗ development of new city parks and

9:01 ↗ amenities and then lastly reinvestment

9:04 ↗ within our existing parks we got some

9:08 ↗ very interesting feedback we did this

9:10 ↗ survey through peak democracy we had

9:13 ↗ just over 600 responses

9:17 ↗ you'll see over all the responses were

9:22 ↗ skewed very much towards athletic fields

9:24 ↗ we really thought it was important to

9:27 ↗ dissect that further when we looked at

9:29 ↗ how Issaquah residents wanted to invest

9:32 ↗ into their system it was much more

9:35 ↗ balanced to be honest there was a lot of

9:37 ↗ proportionality a lot of balance between

9:39 ↗ those five critical areas when you

9:41 ↗ pulled the data from outside Issaquah

9:44 ↗ this isn't surprising we talked a lot

9:46 ↗ about this with the park board I would

9:49 ↗ say non-residents want to invest where

9:52 ↗ they and how they use the system so we

9:55 ↗ have a lot of non-residents who come to

9:56 ↗ utilize our athletic fields they'd love

9:59 ↗ to see more athletic field investment

10:00 ↗ that's not necessarily a bad thing but

10:03 ↗ it's important for us as we went through

10:05 ↗ the prioritization process and as we

10:08 ↗ went through prioritizing those

10:12 ↗ strategic projects and putting them in

10:13 ↗ near-term mid term long term buckets we

10:15 ↗ really felt it was a higher priority to

10:18 ↗ be most responsive to our residents in

10:20 ↗ our residents desire and interest to

10:22 ↗ proportionately invest into our system

10:29 ↗ sorry I have a question yeah there's

10:32 ↗ some thing go back to the previous month

10:34 ↗ there's some math error there because

10:36 ↗ for Sukhois residents and outside of his

10:39 ↗ club residents the numbers total up to

10:40 ↗ 100% plus or minus 1% but overall

10:43 ↗ respondents that only adds up to about

10:45 ↗ 90 percent and also that last category

10:47 ↗ reinvesting exists in existing parks if

10:50 ↗ it's what residents were 20% and outside

10:52 ↗ of his core residents were at 13 percent

10:54 ↗ the total couldn't be in 20 percent

10:56 ↗ right yeah so something there's some

10:59 ↗ math errors so yep we'll check that out

11:02 ↗ good catch

11:06 ↗ so themes as we went through both of

11:09 ↗ those sets of engagement these were the

11:13 ↗ the five themes that really resonated

11:16 ↗ and and really became framework for the

11:22 ↗ strategic projects themselves those

11:25 ↗ themes were I'll go down them

11:26 ↗ placemaking how do we collaborate with

11:30 ↗ the community to look at reimagining and

11:33 ↗ reinvesting into our public spaces our

11:36 ↗ parks our trails how do we strengthen

11:39 ↗ that connection between people and and

11:41 ↗ spaces and places placemaking is a term

11:45 ↗ it's a phrase that you maybe have heard

11:48 ↗ over the last 10 or 15 years that tries

11:51 ↗ to understand there's a there's a art to

11:54 ↗ public spaces that you you want to

11:57 ↗ create places that people want to hang

11:58 ↗ out in and experience it doesn't require

12:01 ↗ a scheduled activity to fill that public

12:04 ↗ space connectivity really speaks for

12:08 ↗ itself

12:09 ↗ it says it incredibly strong in this

12:11 ↗ community this desire to connect to and

12:15 ↗ within the city and and public spaces

12:19 ↗ and schools and shopping areas within

12:21 ↗ the city but also connectivity to the

12:25 ↗ public lands around us innovative action

12:28 ↗ how do we utilize an innovative thinking

12:31 ↗ planning creativity partnerships to

12:35 ↗ really explore and find opportunities to

12:39 ↗ maximize and position our park system to

12:43 ↗ serve our residents well now and well

12:46 ↗ into the future

12:47 ↗ vital environment how do we as we

12:52 ↗ understand well over 75 percent of our

12:55 ↗ land that we steward now is open space

12:57 ↗ and Natural Area how do we make sure

13:00 ↗ we're positioned to manage and steward

13:01 ↗ and celebrate that natural environment

13:04 ↗ and continue that legacy of investment

13:08 ↗ into protection of our of our public

13:13 ↗ lands within and around us

13:16 ↗ lastly active lifestyles how do we

13:20 ↗ understand there's an interest for

13:21 ↗ diversifying the opportunities within

13:24 ↗ and around our system and how do we

13:27 ↗ support that and look at providing

13:29 ↗ additional elements that support the

13:32 ↗ lifestyles that our residents want

13:35 ↗ looking at trail heads and and really

13:38 ↗ being strategic about where trail heads

13:40 ↗ are dog parks creative and more diverse

13:44 ↗ place paces on getting creative about

13:47 ↗ athletic fields are all examples of that

13:54 ↗ as we then landed upon the strategic

13:58 ↗ projects this is this sort of kicks off

14:01 ↗ the strategic project portion of the the

14:03 ↗ plan really that identification map that

14:07 ↗ takes that big picture and and I mean a

14:10 ↗ lot always reflects what we heard

14:11 ↗ collectively from the community this

14:14 ↗ represents 50 just over 50 projects 51

14:16 ↗ projects some large some small I think

14:22 ↗ it really reflects and reflects the

14:24 ↗ geographic balance that we were are

14:26 ↗ seeking to achieve and how we position

14:28 ↗ our our park system

14:29 ↗ for serving our community both current

14:33 ↗ and future this goal this desire for

14:37 ↗ unifying the system so as we're looking

14:39 ↗ at individual projects for years to come

14:42 ↗ we have a big picture we have an

14:44 ↗ understanding of how we're

14:46 ↗ comprehensively unifying the system to

14:49 ↗ balance those singular decisions on as

14:53 ↗ well as what I was saying earlier in

14:55 ↗ terms of projects that represent our

14:58 ↗ keen interest and desire in stewarding

15:01 ↗ and in managing our open spaces whether

15:04 ↗ it's the creeks corridors whether it's

15:06 ↗ our forested hillsides or other

15:10 ↗ sensitive lands in and around in and

15:13 ↗ around Issaquah what we try to do with

15:16 ↗ this map is we're where the projects had

15:19 ↗ an identified site and location we

15:21 ↗ mapped them as you become familiar with

15:24 ↗ this you'll notice some of the numbers

15:26 ↗ don't have a site identified with them

15:28 ↗ so they're on the table to the left

15:30 ↗ but they're listed as no identified site

15:33 ↗ yet dog park is one of those projects

15:35 ↗ that we see as a real near-term

15:37 ↗ strategic project but there's a sighting

15:39 ↗ process that we want to engage the

15:41 ↗ community with before we try and

15:43 ↗ identify that site within this planning

15:47 ↗ effort another part of this section that

15:55 ↗ complements will the the strategic

15:57 ↗ projects but one we felt was really

16:00 ↗ important to draw out in the strategic

16:01 ↗ plan is there are some really strong

16:05 ↗ movements and really strong elements

16:07 ↗ that we see in many ways already do

16:10 ↗ define our Park System but in some ways

16:12 ↗ could define this community's Park

16:15 ↗ system even more and it's this Creek

16:20 ↗ corridor this north-south corridor

16:22 ↗ that's identified by the blue and the

16:24 ↗ red really when you look at combining

16:26 ↗ what we have is the Rainier trail

16:28 ↗ corridor that connects to East Lake

16:30 ↗ Sammamish trail that actually connects

16:33 ↗ down south into Tiger Mountain along

16:36 ↗ with all the properties we've acquired

16:37 ↗ and the opportunity we have along the

16:40 ↗ mystic walk Creek corridor you have this

16:42 ↗ amazing compelling element that the

16:46 ↗ strategic projects really play upon to

16:50 ↗ create a north-south connection from

16:56 ↗ Valley Park to the south all the

16:58 ↗ way up to Lake Sammamish State Park and

17:00 ↗ Lake Sammamish to the north this is many

17:04 ↗ ways represented in another map when you

17:07 ↗ look at the acquisitions that have

17:08 ↗ already occurred the public lands had

17:10 ↗ already occurred along this corridor

17:12 ↗ it's not too hard really to begin to

17:14 ↗ imagine we we can start making these

17:17 ↗ connections in a lot of ways this vision

17:20 ↗ isn't a new one it's I think building

17:22 ↗ upon decades of of great work by

17:26 ↗ community leaders here in Issaquah this

17:29 ↗ plan just tries to I think bring a

17:32 ↗ bigger point of emphasis to the

17:34 ↗ opportunity that we have to really

17:36 ↗ create a strong compelling corridor

17:41 ↗ within our system

17:43 ↗ another corridor that we identified and

17:46 ↗ speak to in the green necklace as well

17:48 ↗ I'd just jump back to this is we have a

17:52 ↗ goal for a number of east-west

17:53 ↗ connections through the city but a real

17:56 ↗ strong opportunity we have in partnering

17:58 ↗ with other cities and with mountains the

18:01 ↗ sound is the mountains to sound Greenway

18:03 ↗ Trail and and this regional vision of

18:06 ↗ creating a trail corridor up through

18:09 ↗ mountains to Sound Greenway that

18:11 ↗ eventually quite frankly connects to the

18:13 ↗ vision that State Parks has for a trail

18:16 ↗ heading all the way to Spokane so the

18:19 ↗ opportunity we have of really making

18:21 ↗ that a strong east-west corridor and

18:26 ↗ where do we want to strategically locate

18:28 ↗ there where would we want residents and

18:30 ↗ visitors alike to experience this equai

18:32 ↗ as they as they go through that corridor

18:36 ↗ is a terrific opportunity another very

18:43 ↗ strong sort of anchor element to this

18:46 ↗ plan is the green necklace itself as I

18:49 ↗ mentioned earlier in January we had the

18:53 ↗ opportunity to lead an interdepartmental

18:55 ↗ effort to further clarify to further

18:59 ↗ build upon the work a lot of great work

19:02 ↗ that has happened with the green

19:03 ↗ necklace and the lens that we took was

19:08 ↗ how does this green necklace not only

19:10 ↗ relate and support central Issaquah and

19:12 ↗ and the very important goals of central

19:14 ↗ listicle visions but also how it

19:19 ↗ connects and supports the broader park

19:21 ↗ system as well we had a number of joint

19:24 ↗ meetings joint meetings being park board

19:27 ↗ and planning policy commission PPC it

19:31 ↗ was interesting as we went through these

19:32 ↗ charettes and these exercises so often

19:36 ↗ residents wanted to go outside the

19:38 ↗ central Issaquah borders meaning they

19:40 ↗ didn't want to just be constrained

19:41 ↗ within and so I think it really

19:43 ↗ supported that that concentric circle

19:46 ↗ map that it was emphasizing earlier as

19:49 ↗ we think of these seventeen elements

19:52 ↗ that that make up the green necklace

19:55 ↗ these 17 elements really have a

19:58 ↗ relationship to central Issaquah but

20:00 ↗ also to greater Issaquah as as well

20:05 ↗ somewhere in these charts it should

20:10 ↗ probably include the localized

20:12 ↗ connections into the mountains that you

20:15 ↗ know beyond the the major east-west

20:18 ↗ trail the fact that we have a bunch of

20:20 ↗ it'd be interesting to add to this the

20:23 ↗ connections up on to Tiger squawk and

20:25 ↗ cougar yeah so as we get into the

20:29 ↗ strategic projects as well it's a great

20:31 ↗ point we have a number of those

20:33 ↗ connections identified and really

20:36 ↗ opportunities to in some ways either

20:38 ↗ formalize or enhance some of those trail

20:40 ↗ heads so and some of those trail heads

20:42 ↗ are hard to do right like the one non

20:45 ↗ squawk up at my house that's 2,000 feet

20:47 ↗ above sea level but some of the ones

20:50 ↗ were on - squawk someone's on - cougar

20:52 ↗ or much closer to sea level much easier

20:54 ↗ to connect to I run apropos to some of

20:56 ↗ the other conversations that community

20:57 ↗ is having right now about connectivity

21:00 ↗ and open spaces absolutely no it's a

21:03 ↗ great comment in fact I would add one

21:04 ↗ that we really see is a strong

21:06 ↗ compelling opportunity to even this

21:09 ↗ anchor corridor and sea level as you

21:11 ↗ mentioned squawk Valley Park I'm going

21:13 ↗ to quickly point to it element 3 there

21:17 ↗ when you look at how that's

21:19 ↗ strategically located and I think right

21:20 ↗ now it feels isolated it feels

21:22 ↗ disconnected but what that property

21:25 ↗ represents not only as a starting point

21:27 ↗ for this this valley trail but we really

21:31 ↗ see the opportunity it could become a

21:35 ↗ trailhead as well it could be a park but

21:37 ↗ it could also without too much

21:39 ↗ imagination become a system as well so

21:48 ↗ as you look at the definition of squawk

21:51 ↗ Valley Park we're pulling out those

21:52 ↗ opportunities that really again look at

21:56 ↗ serving our residents but getting out

21:58 ↗ into the public lands as well one

22:02 ↗ example I like it because if you wanted

22:04 ↗ to 2,000 feet of vertical you know why

22:06 ↗ should you have to go all the way out to

22:08 ↗ - Tiger right why don't want to do it

22:11 ↗ closer yeah yep

22:13 ↗ well and as I think as we see some trail

22:15 ↗ heads in in and around us are

22:18 ↗ overburdened quite frankly and so as we

22:21 ↗ look at sort of spreading that out a

22:23 ↗ little bit and in creating multiple

22:25 ↗ trail heads to connect to a one item I

22:32 ↗ wanted to add to the necklace I

22:33 ↗ apologize is as as that work has been

22:37 ↗ going through Landon Shore and we'll be

22:40 ↗ going through Landon Shore in terms of

22:41 ↗ how that green necklace work connects to

22:46 ↗ centralist revisions we're also adapting

22:49 ↗ as we're looking at the park strategic

22:52 ↗ plan what we're planning right now

22:53 ↗ though it's not in the draft plan is

22:55 ↗ that green necklace the full body of

22:58 ↗ that work will become a chapter within

23:00 ↗ the park plan as as we're again sort of

23:05 ↗ ready to respond to what that central is

23:09 ↗ call visions work tells us but I think

23:11 ↗ what's what's important is that we

23:14 ↗ really see that work as a bridge between

23:16 ↗ those two documents the elements that

23:18 ↗ we've identified in the necklace a

23:21 ↗ number of those are part related

23:23 ↗ projects so we carried those same

23:26 ↗ numbers those same identifying numbers

23:27 ↗ are the same numbers those projects are

23:29 ↗ within the park strategic plan so again

23:32 ↗ trying to create that uniformity and

23:37 ↗ Jeff can you remind me what's the super

23:40 ↗ dark line that runs across near the

23:42 ↗ bottom of the State Park curvy very very

23:46 ↗ very dark line yeah that is a nested set

23:50 ↗ off right away trail connection that we

23:53 ↗ see connecting and really in some ways

23:58 ↗ being another east-west corridor through

24:03 ↗ town whether you want it to go to the

24:05 ↗ south on the Purple Line or whether you

24:06 ↗ want it to go through the State Park and

24:08 ↗ then imagine connecting to the it's a

24:11 ↗ quad creek corridor you'd be able to get

24:14 ↗ through town a variety of ways ask why

24:17 ↗ you denoted it differently than the

24:19 ↗ other proposed major

24:21 ↗ space or connections does it have a

24:25 ↗ different role or level of ordnance or I

24:29 ↗ think as we talk I mean given that it's

24:31 ↗ on state park land given that it's on of

24:34 ↗ it so well the oh you're right and then

24:38 ↗ East

24:39 ↗ I don't okay but it's similar to those

24:43 ↗ the north-south proposed major public's

24:46 ↗ base or connect yes yep so as we started

24:53 ↗ with the map of strategic projects and

24:55 ↗ then as you see in the plan we we took

24:57 ↗ those projects and gave descriptions and

25:00 ↗ and connected them to the themes we

25:03 ↗ conclude that section with this table

25:05 ↗ that tries to compact all that

25:10 ↗ information on these projects and how

25:12 ↗ they get sort of prioritized out in

25:16 ↗ near-term midterm and long-term buckets

25:18 ↗ these buckets are really intended then

25:20 ↗ to inform our future five-year CIP work

25:25 ↗ we've also tried to identify that we

25:29 ↗ have not and wouldn't want to go to a

25:31 ↗ level design that's able to cost

25:33 ↗ estimate all these projects we really

25:35 ↗ want to have future public engagement

25:37 ↗ helping to form that we have an

25:39 ↗ understanding we sort of did the Yelp

25:41 ↗ version of is it a one two or three

25:43 ↗ dollar sign in terms of level of cost

25:47 ↗ and complexity we also wanted to

25:49 ↗ identify those projects that we really

25:51 ↗ see as great opportunities for

25:52 ↗ partnerships whether public public

25:55 ↗ partnerships public-private or any

25:57 ↗ variety thereof we also though each

26:00 ↗ project was put in sort of a primary

26:02 ↗ theme many if not all of these projects

26:04 ↗ really hit on multiple themes in this

26:09 ↗ table it is a nice job of being able to

26:11 ↗ reflect and represent that question yeah

26:16 ↗ so going back to that for a second so we

26:20 ↗ have we haven't exists I'm sorry an

26:24 ↗ existing Park capital projects list

26:27 ↗ what's the relationship between the

26:30 ↗ intent of that existing list which

26:33 ↗ currently cover

26:33 ↗ through I think 2020 mm-hmm and this and

26:37 ↗ and what does this supersede or is this

26:41 ↗ in addition to you sort of get where I'm

26:43 ↗ going to great question yeah if you

26:45 ↗ remember as we went through that CIP

26:47 ↗ process it was always the one saying hey

26:50 ↗ this was a hard exercise because we

26:51 ↗ didn't have the parks strategic plan

26:53 ↗ done and we didn't really want to we

26:55 ↗ didn't want to guess and so I think that

26:57 ↗ CIP exists this then once it's worked

27:02 ↗ through and adopted this the park plan

27:05 ↗ would become that tool that would help

27:07 ↗ inform the next CIP the next five-year

27:12 ↗ CIP that we do first quarter of next

27:14 ↗ year there is some as we have looked

27:17 ↗ through and and are constantly I'm

27:19 ↗ probably looking at this in my sleep

27:21 ↗ sometimes by now there are a couple

27:24 ↗ projects that we've identified and as we

27:27 ↗ looked we looked at the scores realize

27:31 ↗ that there's some amendments one that

27:33 ↗ I'd want to point out that does kind of

27:35 ↗ tie to this CIP work is hillside Park

27:38 ↗ though it's identified here in the long

27:41 ↗ term it's intended to be near-term and I

27:43 ↗ think it's what it's representative of

27:45 ↗ and really reflective of is some of the

27:47 ↗ CIP discussions that happened

27:49 ↗ historically during the last Park Plan

27:51 ↗ process and also some of the feedback we

27:53 ↗ heard from the community as we went

27:55 ↗ through this that along with this mow

27:58 ↗ hillside Park is a large amount of

28:01 ↗ acreage that has a small park on it it

28:03 ↗ has a cemetery it has an interest for

28:06 ↗ more enhanced trails and opportunities

28:09 ↗ to connect squat community down to the

28:11 ↗ valley we really see that as being a

28:15 ↗ near-term project and given some of the

28:18 ↗ pressures and and policy decisions we

28:21 ↗ have around the cemetery and around that

28:23 ↗ park we really see the opportunity for a

28:25 ↗ bigger site master plan effort to help

28:29 ↗ really answer some of those questions

28:31 ↗ but doing that in the in the near term

28:35 ↗ is is something we caught in this as

28:39 ↗ well as we're doing our own vetting

28:42 ↗ through this through this draft process

28:46 ↗ thank you that thanks for the question

28:50 ↗ so this isn't meant for all fluff this

28:55 ↗ plan we we then wrap up with how are we

28:57 ↗ going to get there how are we going to

28:58 ↗ do this and I think the the simple

29:02 ↗ answer

29:03 ↗ much like the the Chinese parable one

29:06 ↗ bite at a time

29:07 ↗ it's really how this is going to happen

29:09 ↗ there's no magic in this but hopefully

29:11 ↗ as we do those bites as we have those

29:14 ↗ more informed future policy decisions we

29:17 ↗ were able to keep this big picture in

29:19 ↗ mind I think another key reminder and as

29:24 ↗ we were going through this effort this

29:25 ↗ table really began to inform and I think

29:28 ↗ helped some of these questions of where

29:30 ↗ does this fit where does this strategic

29:32 ↗ plan fit in a lot of ways this plan is

29:35 ↗ not an ends in itself this plans really

29:38 ↗ is it's just the starting line it's it's

29:41 ↗ not the finish line are we excited to

29:44 ↗ hear that but it really it's the

29:47 ↗ foundation and so this this this graphic

29:50 ↗ just helps to reflect the importance

29:53 ↗ that this work anchors and is the

29:55 ↗ foundation for future future work so

29:58 ↗ this Park strategic plan as you start on

30:00 ↗ the left side that is intended to inform

30:05 ↗ the comp plan the five-year CIP it's

30:07 ↗ another edit we caught that we need to

30:10 ↗ make discussions about funding

30:12 ↗ strategies how do we want to fund our

30:14 ↗ park system this is intended to inform

30:16 ↗ it this isn't intended to be the answer

30:18 ↗ for that other city plans so many other

30:21 ↗ city planning efforts going on that we

30:23 ↗ want this plan to again not be the some

30:27 ↗ type of mandate but it's really intended

30:29 ↗ to inform an influence whether it's

30:32 ↗ right away corridor planning projects or

30:35 ↗ old town vision or central Issaquah

30:38 ↗ visions that in turn obviously informs

30:42 ↗ annual budgets operating capital

30:45 ↗ discussions and and decisions by you as

30:48 ↗ council that then allows us to get into

30:50 ↗ actual capital project work and master

30:53 ↗ planning where we would see another

30:55 ↗ heavy more site-specific phase of public

30:59 ↗ engagement where

31:00 ↗ really going back out to the community

31:01 ↗ now that we have an actual capital

31:03 ↗ project that we're working on in

31:05 ↗ designing and planning for then all of

31:07 ↗ that work helps to inform the outcome a

31:11 ↗ completed project I'd point one thing

31:14 ↗ out in this table that the capital

31:16 ↗ projects piece is really an important

31:18 ↗ checkpoint and one that is I have come

31:21 ↗ on board here a year and a half ago I've

31:25 ↗ so enjoyed my time here there was a lot

31:27 ↗ of conversation going on about some

31:29 ↗ capital projects the skate park central

31:32 ↗ park pad one in particular and how are

31:35 ↗ we going to fund those and how do they

31:37 ↗ fit and I so often remember the question

31:41 ↗ how does this fit in the big picture how

31:42 ↗ does this connect to the big picture and

31:44 ↗ hopefully the next time we're at that

31:47 ↗ point of doing capital projects we'll be

31:49 ↗ able to collectively say oh cool this

31:51 ↗ this was informed by and we can look

31:54 ↗ back and see how it fits within the park

31:56 ↗ plan I think I'm Way over time I'll

32:04 ↗ close with this slide we also wanted to

32:09 ↗ ask ourselves and having the plan some

32:11 ↗ key questions of how are we going to

32:13 ↗ measure success for this plan how do we

32:14 ↗ know it's going to be successful and in

32:17 ↗ a lot of ways these questions really go

32:19 ↗ through that and allow us to think is

32:22 ↗ this is this serving as that big picture

32:25 ↗ we needed to be is this helping to

32:26 ↗ inform other planning work is it just

32:30 ↗ sitting on the Shelf gathering dust

32:32 ↗ that's not going to be successful

32:34 ↗ another part of these questions and a

32:37 ↗ key element we put into this plan is we

32:41 ↗ want it to be a planning tool so we have

32:43 ↗ a what we call we're actually probably

32:45 ↗ going to rename it but we called it the

32:48 ↗ toolkit it's not the full kit in itself

32:50 ↗ but it really is intended to be because

32:53 ↗ we know there's going to be the next

32:56 ↗ great thing that's going to come two

32:57 ↗ years from now the next great project

32:59 ↗ that wasn't in here that's the new hot

33:01 ↗ thing that's all the urgency we've built

33:04 ↗ this toolkit on towards the end of the

33:07 ↗ plan that really in essence allows any

33:11 ↗ new I

33:12 ↗ are thought to go through the same

33:13 ↗ vetting project that these 51 projects

33:16 ↗ went through so it really is hopefully

33:19 ↗ going to allow us to be nimble but also

33:21 ↗ be disciplined in that and not get

33:23 ↗ distracted by the next big thing but let

33:25 ↗ it vet just as as this other work went

33:30 ↗ through so with that thank you I think

33:35 ↗ in many ways this effort confirmed what

33:38 ↗ we already know this plan doesn't

33:40 ↗ represent a hundred and eighty degree

33:41 ↗ change from what this community has done

33:44 ↗ and believed in in many ways it builds

33:47 ↗ upon the great work of many leaders

33:50 ↗ through the decades

33:51 ↗ I'm Harvey Manning being one it was a

33:53 ↗ fun picture to end with but we had a

33:59 ↗ chance these last three weeks we had a

34:01 ↗ open house a couple weeks ago we've

34:03 ↗ gotten some feedback from the community

34:05 ↗ mostly really positive we have gotten

34:09 ↗ some great suggestions that are in some

34:11 ↗ ways helping us that they give anything

34:12 ↗ reformat

34:14 ↗ a little bit the plan and do some

34:16 ↗ additional refinement but look forward

34:19 ↗ to your thoughts feedback discussion and

34:22 ↗ where we want to go from here and before

34:25 ↗ we take questions from Council I just

34:29 ↗ want to mention to the public that it is

34:32 ↗ my intention this well it's always our

34:34 ↗ intention to take public comment in

34:36 ↗ these within these work sessions and

34:37 ↗ actually didn't last month and I

34:39 ↗ apologize but I will be taking public

34:42 ↗ comment as we go item by item so if

34:44 ↗ think about if you if you want to take a

34:46 ↗ couple minutes to give us your thoughts

34:47 ↗ and with that I will turn it over to my

34:49 ↗ fellow council members what do we

34:50 ↗ question x' we have councilmember Rey I

34:53 ↗ just want to start with saying Bravo

34:55 ↗ this is a this is really a nice piece of

34:57 ↗ work Jeff you then you and the team just

34:59 ↗ you know spectacular work a couple of

35:03 ↗ questions for you did you learn anything

35:06 ↗ new I mean you talked about how we kind

35:08 ↗ of built on the back of giants and we

35:10 ↗ confirmed a lot that we already knew but

35:12 ↗ what what what did you learn that you

35:14 ↗ you didn't know go

35:15 ↗ in what was your big aha moments great

35:20 ↗ question I I think one aha moment and

35:23 ↗ this isn't rare for Issaquah was I I

35:26 ↗ think it's a quiet times might have a

35:29 ↗ history of having active uses and

35:33 ↗ passive uses and some we compete against

35:35 ↗ each other and so how do we both in this

35:40 ↗ and in future work try and demystify

35:43 ↗ that and not think of those as

35:45 ↗ necessarily competitive elements but

35:47 ↗ very supportive elements and and try and

35:51 ↗ sort of lift that false choice if you

35:55 ↗ will between active and passive a

35:56 ↗ healthy vibrant system needs to be both

35:59 ↗ it has to be both I think something else

36:01 ↗ that was a real AHA was what I showed

36:04 ↗ you before that those concentric circles

36:07 ↗ and the opportunity we have to really

36:10 ↗ unify not see those as separate

36:12 ↗ districts or separate planning efforts

36:13 ↗ but those are really we need to connect

36:17 ↗ and create a system that supports in and

36:19 ↗ through all of its 'equal

36:24 ↗ or comments councilmember hunt thank you

36:28 ↗ at first I just wanted to echo

36:30 ↗ councilmember Ray's Bravo I think it's

36:33 ↗ very very thorough and very visually

36:38 ↗ appealing plan so thank you for

36:40 ↗ presenting it today and for all the hard

36:41 ↗ work I had a question about a couple

36:46 ↗ questions so the first one is how how do

36:48 ↗ you think community members will access

36:50 ↗ this plan or what are your plans for

36:52 ↗ being able to share the plan with people

36:55 ↗ in in the future and also give feedback

36:58 ↗ because I know that this will be a

36:59 ↗ living document in the future yeah so

37:04 ↗ this will live multiple places and we

37:06 ↗ definitely want this to live online this

37:08 ↗ will be a document that is we're doing

37:11 ↗ whether it's site specific master

37:13 ↗ planning work whether we're doing

37:15 ↗ whether that's with the park board or

37:16 ↗ with all of you we see this as being

37:19 ↗ something we're going to reference quite

37:21 ↗ often so we will hopefully foster and

37:26 ↗ really welcome residents to continue to

37:28 ↗ look at this and

37:29 ↗ and see this either online or hardcopy

37:34 ↗ and then sorry some questions about the

37:39 ↗ well so first about the survey which was

37:42 ↗ about there were two surveys in the

37:46 ↗ parks plan and one was 2015 so a little

37:50 ↗ bit older but it was a telephone survey

37:52 ↗ and that's the one that's referred to as

37:54 ↗ the statistically valid survey and when

37:58 ↗ I was reading the plan that was the one

37:59 ↗ that I gravitated to probably because I

38:02 ↗ had this big statistically valid survey

38:05 ↗ heading and so I wondered if you could

38:07 ↗ describe a little bit the differences

38:09 ↗ because to me the differences are fairly

38:12 ↗ significant and I noticed too that in

38:14 ↗ the in the online survey there's a

38:18 ↗ breakdown of about half a bit more than

38:21 ↗ half of the people said where they

38:23 ↗ resided but actually about half we don't

38:27 ↗ actually know where they resided so

38:28 ↗ we're looking at only about a quarter

38:31 ↗ that that we know for sure we're in

38:33 ↗ Issaquah and the phone surveys are a

38:36 ↗ little bit different in that regard but

38:38 ↗ if you could just describe the

38:40 ↗ differences how you see the two surveys

38:42 ↗ in terms of the outcomes absolutely I

38:44 ↗ think for the most part that the survey

38:47 ↗ responses were quite similar in

38:49 ↗ confirming for one another two of the

38:52 ↗ tables that we there's one table we pull

38:54 ↗ out on the plan and I know Thank You

38:58 ↗ councilmember hunt for referencing that

38:59 ↗ the table on page 18 was one that we

39:02 ↗ pulled out and then we pulled out the

39:04 ↗ table I just showed you from the the

39:06 ↗ phase two engagement again I think both

39:10 ↗ resonated that a lot of elements are

39:15 ↗ very important to our system whereas the

39:19 ↗ statistically valid survey asked

39:21 ↗ questions that didn't ask to

39:25 ↗ proportionately delineate between the

39:29 ↗ two they really spent a lot of time

39:31 ↗ asking what some what's important to you

39:34 ↗ singularly I think what we heard and

39:38 ↗ what we saw was some very very

39:40 ↗ impressive numbers

39:42 ↗ the table shows that that you know 90%

39:45 ↗ of responses feel that you know

39:48 ↗ acquisition of properties is important

39:51 ↗ and I think that really confirms what we

39:53 ↗ really wanted to drive in this plan that

39:55 ↗ in a lot of ways our natural

39:57 ↗ surroundings the creeks that run through

40:00 ↗ is that it so defines Issaquah and and

40:03 ↗ so I think we really carried that

40:04 ↗ through in how we prioritize investments

40:09 ↗ in the plan the second knowing we had

40:12 ↗ that statistically valid survey knowing

40:14 ↗ we didn't necessarily have the budget to

40:16 ↗ do another one that's where the that

40:18 ↗ Phase two investment we use peak

40:21 ↗ democracy and want it to not necessarily

40:23 ↗ just ask level of importance singularly

40:25 ↗ but hey if you had a hundred bucks how

40:27 ↗ would you how would you spend your money

40:30 ↗ how would you balance this ability to

40:34 ↗ invest that and so we think really saw

40:38 ↗ those and if you guys want to respond to

40:40 ↗ this is what we saw those as

40:41 ↗ complementary data that helped to build

40:44 ↗ and inform the prioritization and I have

40:51 ↗ one last question which is about local

40:54 ↗ improvement districts as a potential

40:56 ↗ funding mechanism I very briefly looked

41:02 ↗ online about this it seems possible in

41:06 ↗ some circumstances and so I just

41:09 ↗ wondered if you had any information

41:11 ↗ about that and I I appreciate the very

41:13 ↗ much the toolkit the list of potential

41:15 ↗ funding mechanisms and partnerships and

41:18 ↗ all and all of that creativity and this

41:20 ↗ was just something that I wanted to know

41:22 ↗ a little bit more about yeah

41:25 ↗ so in the in the big picture in the

41:27 ↗ funding chapter we in fact as we've

41:29 ↗ worked with our department feedback

41:31 ↗ interdepartmental feedback Finance

41:34 ↗ Department and others we're trying to

41:36 ↗ figure out how to that's not an

41:37 ↗ all-inclusive list there's so many

41:39 ↗ funding strategies that we want to make

41:41 ↗ sure in the final document were wording

41:43 ↗ that correctly we want this to inform a

41:47 ↗ funding strategy discussion and not try

41:49 ↗ and be the answer specifically to local

41:51 ↗ improvement districts it's it's very

41:53 ↗ interesting timing and

41:56 ↗ the state Parks and Recreation

41:58 ↗ Association as as we as professionals

42:02 ↗ are engaging with the legislature and

42:04 ↗ trying to figure out how to what options

42:06 ↗ do cities have what options do cities

42:08 ↗ and counties have one of the ideas being

42:11 ↗ explored is much like Transportation Li

42:14 ↗ Jie's what would it look like for cities

42:16 ↗ to have that as a as a tool to consider

42:22 ↗ either putting before their their voters

42:24 ↗ for a local Improvement District that

42:26 ↗ would support parks it's not that's what

42:30 ↗ I know I don't know that it's a tool

42:32 ↗ right now but it may be something in the

42:34 ↗ future for us to consider councilmember

42:41 ↗ Goodman thank you I don't have any

42:43 ↗ questions right now but I wanted to echo

42:45 ↗ the other comments and say still

42:49 ↗ digesting but from from what I have read

42:53 ↗ in here so far and I'm just blown away

42:57 ↗ by this this product that we have here

43:01 ↗ and really cannot emphasize enough how

43:04 ↗ pleased I am with this given where we

43:08 ↗ were when we first started this so thank

43:10 ↗ you very much for all the hard work

43:11 ↗ really much appreciate it a lot of

43:15 ↗ community voices in this one fun thing

43:17 ↗ we tried to do is you're looking at it

43:19 ↗ is and we're going to emphasize it a

43:20 ↗ little more you'll see quotes along the

43:21 ↗ way those aren't random quotes those are

43:23 ↗ quotes pulled out from all the the

43:25 ↗ survey feedback the resident feedback we

43:27 ↗ heard so one question and then some

43:32 ↗ comments and we'll get to public comment

43:34 ↗ in this state of the system you've got

43:37 ↗ you've got a couple of charts that look

43:39 ↗ somewhat similar but they're they have

43:42 ↗ an important difference and the first

43:43 ↗ one is parcels within a quarter-mile

43:45 ↗ walk of part trails and sidewalks and

43:47 ↗ then the second one is parcels within a

43:50 ↗ quarter-mile walk of park or open space

43:52 ↗ trails and sidewalks right and the

43:56 ↗ second one is a happier chart than the

43:58 ↗ first one right first one has some has

44:01 ↗ some recreation deserts to it

44:04 ↗ and and I think those recreation deserts

44:06 ↗ are real like I think it's great that

44:09 ↗ there's I mean I I live in an area that

44:11 ↗ has access to a trailhead almost exactly

44:14 ↗ a half mile away but it's it's a

44:16 ↗ trailhead up on to squat Mountain and

44:20 ↗ it's it's nice but I was just out in as

44:24 ↗ it happened the other night in claw

44:26 ↗ honey

44:27 ↗ where I lived in 2003 to 2006 and there

44:30 ↗ was just there's a tweak in my heart

44:32 ↗ because within two blocks of our house

44:34 ↗ was two kids parks and when we moved on

44:37 ↗ to squat my kids were 9 and 6 so they

44:44 ↗ were they were getting towards the end

44:45 ↗ of it but it's still I think there are

44:47 ↗ so many young families in these in these

44:51 ↗ parts of the city that don't have as

44:53 ↗ much recreation and I see this I see

44:56 ↗ this comment on the second page so many

45:02 ↗ properties categorized as open space are

45:04 ↗ readily accessible to pedestrians

45:06 ↗ if appropriately improved with amenities

45:08 ↗ these already owned lands can provide

45:10 ↗ recreation resources to growing

45:12 ↗ population centers yeah but right and I

45:17 ↗ go back to that squawk mountain trail

45:19 ↗ head which is you know room for about

45:22 ↗ six cars and and you just you start

45:25 ↗ walking on that trail right you know

45:27 ↗ open spaces open space and I think it

45:30 ↗ never substitutes

45:31 ↗ you know we run a risk if we try to do

45:35 ↗ too many things with a parcel of land

45:39 ↗ now open space wants to be open space it

45:42 ↗ doesn't also want to have swing sets but

45:44 ↗ we need swing sets and we need the other

45:46 ↗ amenities that that young families want

45:50 ↗ to get their kids out and get fresh air

45:51 ↗ when when fresh air is is worth getting

45:53 ↗ that having been said I'm also really

45:55 ↗ impressed with this report I know how

45:57 ↗ hard city staff has worked for the last

45:59 ↗ three years on this and I really

46:02 ↗ appreciate it and you know council as

46:05 ↗ has been has has really you know there

46:08 ↗ was good work early and then we were

46:09 ↗ like no we want even more because we

46:11 ↗ want this to be something that we can

46:13 ↗ really hang a lot of our public

46:15 ↗ decisions off of

46:16 ↗ through all your guys's hard work that

46:19 ↗ certainly seems it so I'm looking

46:20 ↗ forward to seeing what we do with this

46:23 ↗ going forward and seeing how this serves

46:26 ↗ us as we make strategic decisions going

46:29 ↗ forward and with that are there any

46:31 ↗ other comments all right so I will open

46:33 ↗ it up to the public and I want for

46:34 ↗ anyone who wishes to speak to this up to

46:37 ↗ three minutes with counsel or if nobody

46:40 ↗ wants to they don't have to Oh looks

46:42 ↗ like we have at least one person mister

46:45 ↗ Kapler come up to the mic not so much

46:52 ↗ about the the plan but the issue of

46:54 ↗ sports fields King County provides us

46:57 ↗ all these free parks in terms of open

46:59 ↗ space cooker Mountain both sides of

47:01 ↗ squawk Grande Ridge Park but if you live

47:04 ↗ out in Preston and your kids are in

47:06 ↗ soccer or something it costs you a lot

47:09 ↗ of money and King County to get some of

47:12 ↗ their money out of their park system on

47:15 ↗ these kinds of facilities charges plenty

47:18 ↗ and that's one reason we're seeing the

47:20 ↗ interest out there in more families that

47:25 ↗ don't maybe don't have their kids in the

47:27 ↗ more elite leagues and those kinds of

47:30 ↗ things are looking there they're come

47:32 ↗ there more in the Issaquah stuff in the

47:34 ↗ school district stuff and not in those

47:36 ↗ fields at Preston which are really tied

47:39 ↗ up with very expensive salt soccer

47:42 ↗ leagues thank you thank you anyone else

47:46 ↗ it's March

47:55 ↗ so one I think finally we might have a

48:00 ↗ chance of getting parks with intent

48:03 ↗ rather than just saying well look now we

48:07 ↗ have an opportunity and and we don't

48:10 ↗ really know we haven't talked to the

48:11 ↗ public but let's go for it anyway and I

48:13 ↗ appreciate that

48:16 ↗ to the nth degree they have worked very

48:19 ↗ hard now me I want to be able to use the

48:23 ↗ plan I want to be able to understand the

48:24 ↗ plan and I don't quite see you have one

48:28 ↗ of one of the issues that a person has a

48:33 ↗ good idea right and they say wow this

48:37 ↗ should go into our park system it's not

48:40 ↗ clear from this plan what sort of a

48:43 ↗ mechanism there is for those those good

48:46 ↗ ideas right it doesn't have a natural

48:48 ↗ interface with the public and within

48:53 ↗ that interface we live sort of in our

48:56 ↗ neighborhoods and this is not a very

48:59 ↗ neighborhood oriented plan and it has

49:06 ↗ many good things but how do you decide

49:10 ↗ whether you are satisfied with your

49:12 ↗ parks system and how do you ask people

49:16 ↗ whether they are satisfied every five

49:19 ↗ years you have a statistically valid

49:22 ↗ survey so that is not really answered

49:28 ↗ here to me it's like well when we

49:31 ↗ measure to see if it's working there are

49:35 ↗ really no measurables that are hard

49:38 ↗ there so okay if we're using soft

49:42 ↗ measurables who's ever asking the

49:44 ↗ community how they're thinking about

49:46 ↗ their park system and so I think it's a

49:49 ↗ little light on the community and the

49:51 ↗ goals and policies and it's light on the

49:54 ↗ community interface section and of

49:57 ↗ course I will pound on that because that

49:58 ↗ is that is my core I like that we're

50:03 ↗ looking at access we're looking at mulch

50:05 ↗ full uses of parks I am a little concern

50:08 ↗ that it seems to be we're planning hard

50:10 ↗ for parks for people who are going to

50:12 ↗ move here in the future and it doesn't

50:15 ↗ feel like the people who are already

50:17 ↗ here getting as much attention with this

50:19 ↗ plan so that is that is a little

50:23 ↗ distressing the toolkit that they in the

50:28 ↗ process that they put the projects

50:31 ↗ through doesn't have that lack of of

50:34 ↗ bias just the plan does and and so

50:39 ↗ that's a little awkward to me it seems

50:41 ↗ like if the toolkit is getting all the

50:43 ↗ neighborhood's the things that they

50:45 ↗ might need that the plan needs to

50:47 ↗ reflect that a little bit better so one

50:52 ↗ last comment which is going to make the

50:54 ↗ the parks staff even crazier than

50:57 ↗ they've already made them with my anal

50:59 ↗ retentive scanning of their plan I want

51:03 ↗ the conclusion and the short form of

51:07 ↗ what this park plan the strategic plan

51:10 ↗ is achieving at the front I want to see

51:14 ↗ very quickly that we got a cool set of

51:18 ↗ strategic projects out of it I don't

51:20 ↗ want to have to wait till the very end

51:22 ↗ after however many pages to do that so I

51:26 ↗ think with measurables up there and that

51:29 ↗ conclusion and then go into the plan and

51:31 ↗ how you got there that that's a better

51:33 ↗ format for me thanks thank you very much

51:37 ↗ so your Modell's wishing to speak to

51:39 ↗ this before I move on going once going

51:43 ↗ twice

51:43 ↗ all right with that we're gonna move on

51:46 ↗ to ID 0 to 1 6 transit oriented

51:48 ↗ development

51:49 ↗ presented by Jen Davis Hays and Al

51:53 ↗ Ferris and our own city administrator

51:59 ↗ here Emily moon thank you I just have a

52:00 ↗ few remarks as we kick this off miss Jen

52:04 ↗ transition slides here so we're here

52:09 ↗ tonight to advance the discussion and

52:11 ↗ deliberation on a particular aspect of

52:15 ↗ the transit oriented development

52:16 ↗ approach

52:17 ↗ staff presented a memo and a

52:20 ↗ presentation and a couple of policy

52:22 ↗ questions at the April 24th committee of

52:25 ↗ the whole those pieces outlined the full

52:29 ↗ Tod project and specific aspects of it

52:33 ↗ highlights from that presentation

52:34 ↗ included the funding update project site

52:38 ↗ considerations update and some next

52:41 ↗ steps which include confirming the

52:43 ↗ opportunities Center tenants and use and

52:47 ↗ a related city decision regarding a

52:49 ↗ potential investment in that space I

52:51 ↗ also included some aspects of our

52:55 ↗ negotiations and approval of a

52:58 ↗ development agreement as next steps and

53:01 ↗ lastly a next step of finalizing the

53:04 ↗ short plat this is a really messy

53:07 ↗ equation a very complicated puzzle that

53:11 ↗ we are trying to put together and we are

53:13 ↗ looking for councils input to help us to

53:16 ↗ limit or refine the options that are

53:18 ↗ available to us so we wanted to start

53:21 ↗ tonight by just saying we know it's

53:24 ↗ uncomfortable it's particularly

53:26 ↗ uncomfortable it's uncomfortable to us

53:27 ↗ as well because we still have imperfect

53:30 ↗ or incomplete information and yet we're

53:33 ↗ coming to you and asking for some

53:35 ↗ feedback at this time and that's because

53:38 ↗ we've accomplished a great deal so far

53:40 ↗ and putting together this highly complex

53:43 ↗ public/private partnership and while we

53:46 ↗ still have more to determine we believe

53:48 ↗ we have enough now to come forward to

53:50 ↗ you and engage you in some dialogue and

53:52 ↗ seek some direction so as you heard on

53:55 ↗ April 24th given the nature of the

53:57 ↗ project not all aspects of the project

54:00 ↗ are candidates for direct public

54:02 ↗ engagement and decision making but all

54:04 ↗ aspects will be reflected in the

54:06 ↗ council's deliberations on the

54:08 ↗ development agreement and other pieces

54:10 ↗ one aspect in particular where the city

54:13 ↗ is the primary decision-maker is the

54:16 ↗ opportunities center and that's what

54:18 ↗ we're focused on this evening also

54:21 ↗ attempted to keep the bigger picture

54:23 ↗ deliberations with the full council

54:25 ↗ and tonight's attendance isn't

54:28 ↗ reflective of that but that was the

54:30 ↗ attempt as we knew that there was full

54:32 ↗ council interest in this project and a

54:35 ↗ desire for all of you to discuss it with

54:37 ↗ each other another next step following

54:39 ↗ tonight will be to draft a resolution

54:42 ↗ with the developer regarding the city's

54:45 ↗ commitment to the opportunity center our

54:48 ↗ current timeline suggests that a

54:50 ↗ resolution could come forward on that on

54:52 ↗ June 4th so with that I'll turn it over

54:55 ↗ to Jen for the presentation great thank

54:58 ↗ you

54:59 ↗ Thank You Emily so again thank you for

55:02 ↗ being here tonight having us here

55:04 ↗ tonight to talk about the opportunity

55:06 ↗ center we'll do a brief overview of the

55:09 ↗ project and discuss the funding gap in

55:11 ↗ options and again we are here tonight to

55:13 ↗ receive direction on the opportunity

55:15 ↗ center use and investment and then we'll

55:17 ↗ talk about next steps so we have an

55:18 ↗ all-star cast here tonight that we'll be

55:20 ↗ presenting to you starting off with

55:21 ↗ Emily we also have our development team

55:24 ↗ health errors from spectrum development

55:25 ↗ solutions and Dan Landis from King

55:28 ↗ County Housing Authority and David

55:29 ↗ Fujimoto from the Office of

55:30 ↗ Sustainability will be here to talk more

55:32 ↗ detail about the opportunity Center so

55:36 ↗ start off with as Emily mentioned we

55:40 ↗ have done a lot of work to this point

55:42 ↗ and we are at the moment when we need to

55:45 ↗ have a direction from the City Council

55:46 ↗ in order to move forward we will talk

55:49 ↗ about these details tonight but we want

55:51 ↗ you to know that no decision has been

55:52 ↗ made on the opportunity center user or

55:54 ↗ an investment has been promised to this

55:56 ↗ point the timing is really important

56:00 ↗ because of the funding that the

56:02 ↗ development team has acquired from both

56:04 ↗ public and private funders and they'll

56:07 ↗ address that during their presentation

56:09 ↗ tonight so again as Emily mentioned we

56:11 ↗ hope to come back on June 4th was with a

56:13 ↗ resolution at the end of the the

56:16 ↗ discussion we'll talk about the next

56:18 ↗ steps which include community outreach

56:20 ↗ meetings we plan to have two of those at

56:22 ↗ least and then our development agreement

56:24 ↗ timing and I wanted to point out here

56:27 ↗ for the timeline because this project

56:28 ↗ has taking a while we've actually been

56:31 ↗ talking about this project for quite a

56:32 ↗ while it has many moving pieces and we

56:35 ↗ won't actually see the Tod project being

56:38 ↗ dawn until 2020 because first the

56:42 ↗ CenturyLink relocation site needs to be

56:44 ↗ built in CenturyLink needs to move but

56:46 ↗ that plan for the Tod opening is in 2022

56:49 ↗ so with that we'll move forward and so

56:54 ↗ we wanted to present upfront as you

56:55 ↗ listen to this presentation what are the

56:57 ↗ things we're requesting from you tonight

56:59 ↗ so should we continue to pursue the

57:01 ↗ medical dental and behavioral health

57:03 ↗ user that we identified through the

57:05 ↗ opportunity Center RFP which will

57:07 ↗ provide you more details with tonight

57:08 ↗ about and then is the level investment

57:10 ↗ acceptable for this public benefit and

57:12 ↗ we will have again options tonight with

57:14 ↗ with dollar amounts and we'll have that

57:15 ↗ discussion later any questions about

57:18 ↗ this so far yes I just want I just want

57:21 ↗ to make sure did I provide clarity so

57:23 ↗ there's a number there's this

57:25 ↗ Opportunity Center and there's a number

57:27 ↗ of different potential tenants that

57:30 ↗ could be engaged in the opportunity

57:31 ↗ center and you're gonna talk about a

57:34 ↗ couple of classes of potential tenants

57:38 ↗ and you want to know on at least one of

57:41 ↗ those let's say flavors of what the

57:43 ↗ opportunity center would look like what

57:45 ↗ our appetite is for that flavor given

57:47 ↗ what some of the what it might take to

57:50 ↗ make that flavor happen but there's

57:53 ↗ other flavors as well out there and it's

57:55 ↗ just on one of them it's it's more

57:57 ↗ complicated or potentially a bigger a

58:00 ↗ bigger bill than on other flavors and so

58:03 ↗ you want to understand how we feel about

58:06 ↗ that flavor but there's also all these

58:09 ↗ other flavors okay and yes and so the

58:11 ↗ direction you provide us with a decision

58:13 ↗ not not tonight but on June 4th if

58:15 ↗ that's possible we would then go and

58:17 ↗ pursue refining that flavor and coming

58:21 ↗ back for more details during the

58:22 ↗ development agreement process okay did

58:24 ↗ you have a question I have a procedural

58:26 ↗ question and just to clarify so tonight

58:29 ↗ we're really getting information from

58:31 ↗ you and then we will give you a

58:32 ↗ direction on June 4th is that the

58:34 ↗ thinking we would like some feedback

58:36 ↗ tonight as far as so if there's

58:37 ↗ additional information so we hope to

58:39 ↗ come back on June 4th with a resolution

58:41 ↗ for discussion but for also for approval

58:44 ↗ or to pursue whichever option

58:47 ↗ that again from tonight's discussion and

58:49 ↗ other information that we need to gather

58:51 ↗ and talking to their council members

58:52 ↗ that make sense and and I'm going to

58:56 ↗ it's unusual that we only have four of

58:58 ↗ the seven of us here so I'm gonna reach

59:00 ↗ out to council members we're almost

59:02 ↗ winter Stein and Batista and ask them to

59:04 ↗ get their feet back in as soon as they

59:05 ↗ can although with council member batiste

59:07 ↗ being out out of the country she's

59:09 ↗ probably gonna be a little bit slower

59:10 ↗ sure yes thank you so to step back for a

59:16 ↗ moment you know what is Tod so we as we

59:19 ↗ know we're community and transition and

59:21 ↗ we're moving from the auto oriented to

59:22 ↗ other options such as biking and walking

59:24 ↗ the concept of a TD is not one project

59:27 ↗ and so I thought this image really

59:28 ↗ reflected well what a Tod community is

59:31 ↗ about so we're talking about an area all

59:33 ↗ together so it's also tonight you heard

59:35 ↗ about the parks so Dziedzic plan that's

59:37 ↗ that plays a piece in it our central

59:39 ↗ Isabel plan plays a piece in it our walk

59:41 ↗ and roll strategy plays a piece on it

59:42 ↗ it's really bringing together diverse

59:45 ↗ high activity uses increasing transit

59:48 ↗ usage bike biking walking people who are

59:51 ↗ where people can live work shop play

59:54 ↗ learn all in one area so what we're

59:56 ↗ talking about for this one project does

59:59 ↗ not is not going to make a Tod area but

1:00:02 ↗ it's gonna help make a large investment

1:00:04 ↗ and start that towards our goal to align

1:00:08 ↗ with the central Issaquah plan so in the

1:00:10 ↗ central is a call plan this again this

1:00:12 ↗ this area is in the urban core our

1:00:14 ↗ regional growth center we're gonna

1:00:16 ↗ create more housing with this project

1:00:18 ↗ where there is no housing today we're

1:00:21 ↗ going to increase affordable housing

1:00:23 ↗ where there is no affordable housing

1:00:25 ↗ today we're going to create a mixed-use

1:00:27 ↗ pedestrian oriented streetscape which

1:00:29 ↗ again is lacking today we're gonna

1:00:32 ↗ provide additional public spaces that

1:00:34 ↗ are gonna interact with our park across

1:00:36 ↗ the street and we're gonna make sure

1:00:38 ↗ that the design is integrated with the

1:00:40 ↗ area amenity sentences Transit Center in

1:00:42 ↗ the park and overall it because it's

1:00:45 ↗ adjacent to the Transit Center it's

1:00:47 ↗ going to encourage increase encourage

1:00:49 ↗ transits transit usage again over time

1:00:52 ↗ we will see that change happening in our

1:00:54 ↗ community

1:00:59 ↗ so as Emily mentioned this is a complex

1:01:04 ↗ project we have multiple partners who

1:01:06 ↗ are involved in this and multiple pieces

1:01:09 ↗ of land it is definitely when we looked

1:01:12 ↗ at doing this project we approached it

1:01:14 ↗ as a private public partnership we

1:01:16 ↗ published the RFP for this project in

1:01:19 ↗ December of 2016 and at that time we had

1:01:24 ↗ been working with CenturyLink for over a

1:01:25 ↗ year to talk to them about their

1:01:27 ↗ interest in relocating to another site

1:01:29 ↗ they were happy where they are located

1:01:33 ↗ is an ease of access on on and off

1:01:36 ↗ multiple freeways highways they serve a

1:01:40 ↗ broader region there was another piece

1:01:42 ↗ of land in Issaquah that we could easily

1:01:44 ↗ identify for them to relocate to we had

1:01:48 ↗ the opportunity to purchase a king

1:01:50 ↗ county surplus land and that made this

1:01:52 ↗ whole thing possible so when we did the

1:01:55 ↗ RFP we worked with arch or our

1:01:58 ↗ partnership and funding to develop what

1:02:00 ↗ we thought was possible on this site and

1:02:02 ↗ so these are the requirements that we

1:02:03 ↗ said must be we received three responses

1:02:08 ↗ from spectrum in King County Housing

1:02:10 ↗ Authority from imagine housing and from

1:02:13 ↗ shelter resources our panel in January

1:02:16 ↗ 2017 who included the mayor's office

1:02:18 ↗ office sustainability economic

1:02:20 ↗ development and arch to look at all the

1:02:24 ↗ proposals based on the development team

1:02:26 ↗ their project soundness the public

1:02:28 ↗ benefit and the project design so we

1:02:30 ↗ felt that spectrums and King County

1:02:32 ↗ Housing Authority's proposal best

1:02:34 ↗ represented the central Issaquah vision

1:02:36 ↗ and also provided additional benefits so

1:02:39 ↗ I'm going to have Hal and Dan come up

1:02:41 ↗ and talk about their proposal but before

1:02:43 ↗ I do they are there any questions about

1:02:44 ↗ the actual process RFP for this okay how

1:02:53 ↗ yeah

1:02:56 ↗ so when the RFP was first published they

1:03:00 ↗ called for 200 total units approximately

1:03:02 ↗ half of which were to be affordable oh

1:03:05 ↗ no hi I'm Hal fairest by the way I

1:03:07 ↗ didn't say that into the microphone and

1:03:10 ↗ I'm glad to be here tonight so so when

1:03:13 ↗ we reached out and asked if the King

1:03:15 ↗ County Housing Authority wanted to join

1:03:17 ↗ us we really had a vision greater than

1:03:21 ↗ what was required in the RFP to put

1:03:22 ↗ together and we really felt it was a

1:03:24 ↗ large site that the zoning was in place

1:03:27 ↗ and that the the opportunity was there

1:03:30 ↗ to really create something different

1:03:31 ↗ that has not happened in our region in

1:03:33 ↗ tarz integrating affordability with them

1:03:37 ↗ with the pedestrian orientation on this

1:03:39 ↗ site so we we submitted a proposal then

1:03:42 ↗ at that time had 325 total units and

1:03:49 ↗ there were approximately 155 that were

1:03:52 ↗ affordable in our submission along with

1:03:56 ↗ the commercial space and the Opportunity

1:03:58 ↗ Center in the quarter acre Plaza as we

1:04:01 ↗ worked that through there were a lot of

1:04:02 ↗ issues over the cost per unit to develop

1:04:05 ↗ that project and we get into the reasons

1:04:08 ↗ why here in a little bit but we worked

1:04:11 ↗ with the housing authority to see could

1:04:12 ↗ we better utilize the the structure the

1:04:15 ↗ podium that we were building and we came

1:04:17 ↗ back in August with a revision to our

1:04:20 ↗ proposal that increased the total number

1:04:22 ↗ of units to 355 and increased the term

1:04:25 ↗ the number of units that were affordable

1:04:27 ↗ to 175 and those are permanently

1:04:30 ↗ affordable units where previously some

1:04:32 ↗ of our units were only affordable for 12

1:04:34 ↗ years so those are things that we did to

1:04:37 ↗ try to make the application the Housing

1:04:39 ↗ Authority was to submit in September

1:04:41 ↗ more competitive so that we could be

1:04:43 ↗ more successful in achieving the money

1:04:45 ↗ they needed to provide the amount of

1:04:47 ↗ affordable units for the project and

1:04:51 ↗ away vans okay

1:04:53 ↗ this arrow this circle okay so things we

1:04:57 ↗ and we had come and talked with you

1:05:00 ↗ several times at this point in time and

1:05:03 ↗ we were maybe a application in September

1:05:06 ↗ September 15th I believe is when the

1:05:08 ↗ winning

1:05:09 ↗ to the county and shortly thereafter for

1:05:12 ↗ arch funding and at the same time we had

1:05:14 ↗ reached an MoU agreement along with the

1:05:16 ↗ city the housing authority ourselves and

1:05:18 ↗ Century Link and one of the things

1:05:20 ↗ CenturyLink including that was we needed

1:05:23 ↗ to be able to access their site to do

1:05:25 ↗ our due diligence it's called to test

1:05:27 ↗ for the environment all the soils the

1:05:29 ↗ survey and we weren't able to get that

1:05:32 ↗ until October so in late fall of this

1:05:35 ↗ last year of 2017 we went out and were

1:05:38 ↗ able to do our borings on-site to test

1:05:41 ↗ for environmental contamination to test

1:05:44 ↗ for the soil bearing capacity of the

1:05:46 ↗ soil and under underground conditions

1:05:48 ↗ and and to look at how our overall

1:05:53 ↗ design was affected by that information

1:05:55 ↗ and we found was wine was good news was

1:05:58 ↗ that neither the ground water nor the

1:06:00 ↗ soil tested positive above any cleanup

1:06:02 ↗ level there was you know minor amounts

1:06:04 ↗ they'd had a previously an underground

1:06:07 ↗ storage tank that had been removed and

1:06:08 ↗ cleaned up and they've gotten all the

1:06:11 ↗ paperwork signed off on that again prior

1:06:14 ↗ a couple years ago we did find however

1:06:16 ↗ which is probably no surprise to anybody

1:06:18 ↗ from Issaquah that the groundwater in

1:06:22 ↗ that location is six feet below the

1:06:25 ↗ surface I mean it's right there and you

1:06:27 ↗ can look at the wetland between

1:06:29 ↗ ourselves and the Transit Center and you

1:06:31 ↗ can see the standing water there many

1:06:33 ↗ months out of the year and certainly

1:06:34 ↗ during the winter time so that we had we

1:06:38 ↗ had previously made a revision to our

1:06:40 ↗ design which had put a connecting

1:06:43 ↗ parking garage we called down in the

1:06:44 ↗ ground and and then we were having this

1:06:47 ↗ large parking with underground basically

1:06:50 ↗ and some surface parking still

1:06:53 ↗ structured but behind the buildings and

1:06:54 ↗ we realized that you can do that by

1:06:58 ↗ pumping down the groundwater and

1:07:01 ↗ building a bathtub basically a really

1:07:03 ↗ big bathtub that would hold 275 cars but

1:07:07 ↗ we we felt that we wanted to take

1:07:09 ↗ another look at that so we've come back

1:07:11 ↗ with a modified design now that pulls

1:07:14 ↗ it's all 100% structured parking so

1:07:16 ↗ we're well in excess of your 50%

1:07:19 ↗ requirement

1:07:20 ↗ and we have some on great parking that

1:07:23 ↗ is immediately behind where the

1:07:25 ↗ Opportunity Center would be and behind

1:07:27 ↗ where the daycare and and the kidney

1:07:30 ↗ center would be but there is then a ramp

1:07:31 ↗ inside the structure that takes you up

1:07:34 ↗ to the next level where we have car

1:07:35 ↗ parking and then you go up to a level

1:07:37 ↗ above that so we basically went up

1:07:39 ↗ instead of down

1:07:40 ↗ and we saved the money on you know on

1:07:44 ↗ digging a hole and putting all the

1:07:46 ↗ waterproofing in but we have to spend

1:07:48 ↗ more structure and it pushes the top

1:07:50 ↗ floor of the building up ten feet higher

1:07:52 ↗ than it was before but it's still well

1:07:54 ↗ below where I think 85 feet tall total I

1:07:57 ↗ think when you go to 120 feet or 115

1:07:59 ↗ feet by your zoning so we're still the

1:08:02 ↗ maximum height we can go with our wood

1:08:04 ↗ frame construction so that that is

1:08:07 ↗ something we learned so that is our

1:08:08 ↗ third basically concept that we're at

1:08:11 ↗ now and we are looking to as with the

1:08:14 ↗ direction from the council on the

1:08:16 ↗ opportunity center we're actually

1:08:19 ↗ looking at trying to see if we can't

1:08:20 ↗ increase the amount of affordable units

1:08:22 ↗ the housing authority is doing an ad

1:08:24 ↗ hopefully ten more units with the same

1:08:26 ↗ within the same podium base that we had

1:08:29 ↗ before as we're able to kind of refine

1:08:31 ↗ it a little bit more and that's all good

1:08:33 ↗ news for Issaquah does nothing but

1:08:35 ↗ create more affordability and it again

1:08:37 ↗ helps bring down the cost per unit which

1:08:39 ↗ is what we're trying to achieve for the

1:08:41 ↗ housing authority so those are the the

1:08:43 ↗ highlights of where we've been in our

1:08:45 ↗ journey so far and previously the staff

1:08:50 ↗ had identified kind of in ranking order

1:08:52 ↗ all the funding that went into the

1:08:54 ↗ project but we had not filled in all the

1:08:56 ↗ numbers and these will change the only

1:08:58 ↗ thing we know for sure is that these

1:08:59 ↗ numbers will change and and most of it

1:09:03 ↗ will be the numbers at the top of the

1:09:04 ↗ list is compared to the bottom of the

1:09:05 ↗ list

1:09:06 ↗ and so you can see that where the bulk

1:09:09 ↗ of the money there's a loan that our

1:09:11 ↗ firm with our capital partner will take

1:09:14 ↗ out we utilize a HUD loan and it gives

1:09:19 ↗ us a long-term fixed mortgage rate which

1:09:21 ↗ is what makes it attractive but there's

1:09:23 ↗ 58 million dollar loan 30 million

1:09:25 ↗ dollars in private equity that are there

1:09:28 ↗ Norton our capital partner will be

1:09:30 ↗ putting in so those are prime

1:09:32 ↗ early going to the market rate and the

1:09:34 ↗ affordable units that we have within

1:09:36 ↗ that building and it's also the same

1:09:38 ↗ building that right now under one of the

1:09:40 ↗ scenarios where the kidney center and

1:09:42 ↗ the daycare would also be located and

1:09:45 ↗ then the other Dan come up and talk

1:09:48 ↗ about the other sources of funding that

1:09:50 ↗ King County Housing Authority has put

1:09:51 ↗ together we do have the the commercial

1:09:54 ↗ tenants that the kidney center will own

1:09:57 ↗ their space like a condominium so their

1:10:00 ↗ space of about 10,000 square feet will

1:10:03 ↗ cost about nine million dollars and then

1:10:05 ↗ on top of that they'll put all their

1:10:07 ↗ equipment in and all their other

1:10:08 ↗ improvements that go into that and then

1:10:12 ↗ the very bottom the multifamily tax

1:10:14 ↗ exemption that you've waived subject to

1:10:17 ↗ our development agreement being approved

1:10:19 ↗ would be benefiting the you know the

1:10:23 ↗ private side of the development so you

1:10:25 ↗ can see the city is an instrumental

1:10:27 ↗ piece in terms of the chess making and

1:10:29 ↗ making all the pieces work but in terms

1:10:31 ↗ of actual economic contribution they're

1:10:32 ↗ very much in the minority at the bottom

1:10:35 ↗ of the list with a very small percentage

1:10:36 ↗ of the total capital and and I did want

1:10:39 ↗ to say I spoke last time you saw me at

1:10:41 ↗ the committee of the whole

1:10:42 ↗ and was expressed my opinion about the

1:10:48 ↗ Opportunity Center Pacific specifically

1:10:51 ↗ health point and and the mental health

1:10:55 ↗ provider Valley City's not being the

1:10:57 ↗ best choice and my my opinion on that

1:10:59 ↗ was specifically related to the one as

1:11:01 ↗ you'll see that it it requires the

1:11:03 ↗ greatest commitment from the city and it

1:11:04 ↗ does require additional parking above

1:11:06 ↗ and beyond we together at the Housing

1:11:08 ↗ Authority and ourselves we are very

1:11:10 ↗ comfortable with the use of the health

1:11:12 ↗ facility at this facility I've been to

1:11:15 ↗ since it was first proposed my wife and

1:11:18 ↗ I have driven around and seen several of

1:11:20 ↗ the health point facilities they're very

1:11:22 ↗ nice they're well very well done the

1:11:25 ↗ people that participate there are their

1:11:27 ↗ primary constituents are people using

1:11:29 ↗ Apple Health Medicaid supported health

1:11:33 ↗ care and those are people in our

1:11:35 ↗ community that are at great risk in

1:11:37 ↗ getting health care so it's a it's there

1:11:41 ↗ isn't another facility in Issaquah that

1:11:43 ↗ provides that and it's getting harder

1:11:44 ↗ and harder for people

1:11:46 ↗ Medicaid to be able to find carry our

1:11:48 ↗ you know service providers that will

1:11:51 ↗ service them so there would be a good

1:11:52 ↗ asset the other not-for-profits the

1:11:55 ↗ proposed as well also provide a need

1:11:57 ↗ service that there's great need in

1:11:59 ↗ Issaquah as well so I think those are

1:12:00 ↗ choices that the council needs to

1:12:02 ↗ consider in their deliberations I'm Dan

1:12:11 ↗ Landis I'm with King County Housing

1:12:12 ↗ Authority and I just wanted to briefly

1:12:14 ↗ talk about the financing that we have

1:12:16 ↗ raised for the affordable units as well

1:12:18 ↗ as what's left for us to raise and we

1:12:22 ↗ got the good news is we have gotten the

1:12:24 ↗ hardest money that there is to get in

1:12:26 ↗ this the ten million dollars from King

1:12:28 ↗ County that was a I think twice what

1:12:31 ↗ they put into any other project so far

1:12:33 ↗ and so we a lot of people went into the

1:12:36 ↗ success of that including the city of

1:12:39 ↗ Issaquah extensively lobbying on behalf

1:12:41 ↗ of the project and that's stadium bond

1:12:45 ↗ money right every time you go to a

1:12:48 ↗ Mariners game or a Sounders game you are

1:12:50 ↗ helping build transit or development at

1:12:53 ↗ this point and the the other funding was

1:12:56 ↗ from arch two million dollars which also

1:12:58 ↗ is on the high end of what they've ever

1:13:00 ↗ given to a project and both of those so

1:13:02 ↗ we were awarded the county money in

1:13:05 ↗ December and I think we've been awarded

1:13:08 ↗ the arch money haven't gotten the

1:13:09 ↗ official word on that yet but the and

1:13:12 ↗ certainly the city of Issaquah should be

1:13:14 ↗ thanked for contributing to that as well

1:13:16 ↗ as a number of other Eastside cities the

1:13:19 ↗ so that money is competitive money we

1:13:22 ↗ had and we got more than are we asked

1:13:25 ↗ for the moon and got the moon and so

1:13:26 ↗ we're really happy about that well

1:13:28 ↗ however the majority of the financing

1:13:30 ↗ that will it will take for us to build

1:13:32 ↗ the housing is yet to be secured and

1:13:34 ↗ that's the low-income housing tax

1:13:36 ↗ credits and the tax exempt bond

1:13:37 ↗ financing neither one of those are

1:13:39 ↗ particularly competitive we will get

1:13:41 ↗ those but what we don't know at this

1:13:43 ↗ point in time is how valuable they will

1:13:45 ↗ be you may have seen in the in the last

1:13:50 ↗ six months how the taxes that low-income

1:13:53 ↗ housing tax credit program has kind of

1:13:55 ↗ been turned on its head and it's a lot

1:13:58 ↗ different than it was when we submitted

1:13:59 ↗ applications we foresaw some of the

1:14:01 ↗ changes and I think our the pricing for

1:14:04 ↗ those tax credits that we had in our

1:14:06 ↗ application is still accurate to what it

1:14:09 ↗ would be today but we don't know what

1:14:11 ↗ it's going to be when we actually go out

1:14:12 ↗ and sell those tax credits right before

1:14:15 ↗ we start construction so we're a little

1:14:16 ↗ concerned there and we're concerned

1:14:18 ↗ about interest rates rising as I think

1:14:19 ↗ Hal is too for his his portion so we are

1:14:22 ↗ very anxious both to show progress to

1:14:26 ↗ the public funders that have already

1:14:28 ↗ committed money to this as well as to

1:14:30 ↗ avoid and/or get this get get us to the

1:14:34 ↗ point where we can lock in the rest of

1:14:36 ↗ our financing which we really can't do

1:14:38 ↗ until we're about ready to start

1:14:39 ↗ construction so your ability to sort of

1:14:42 ↗ help us tie up all of the pieces of this

1:14:45 ↗ and especially the the financing for the

1:14:47 ↗ Opportunity Center is really helpful

1:14:54 ↗ thanks Dan and Hal so as we just saw the

1:14:59 ↗ project itself is a 165 million dollar

1:15:01 ↗ investment so as we tonight talk about

1:15:04 ↗ investment from the city we wanted to

1:15:06 ↗ let you see what the city or it has

1:15:08 ↗ already committed for investment so the

1:15:12 ↗ top number here is the city waived

1:15:13 ↗ impact in permit fees and that's already

1:15:15 ↗ in the IMC so this is just for the res

1:15:19 ↗ for the affordable housing residential

1:15:22 ↗ units so the project will pay for impact

1:15:25 ↗ fees for the for the market rate

1:15:29 ↗ residential units so that does not mean

1:15:31 ↗ that we're not being paying any impact

1:15:33 ↗ fees on this and the commercial spaces

1:15:35 ↗ will also pay impact fees the relocation

1:15:39 ↗ site cost so that's again for the

1:15:41 ↗ purchase remediation short plat of the

1:15:43 ↗ portion of the king county island or

1:15:45 ↗ king county roads property it's about

1:15:46 ↗ three hundred thousand dollars and that

1:15:47 ↗ is cash that the city has expended

1:15:50 ↗ already and then the property tax has

1:15:53 ↗ not collected over 12 years for the

1:15:56 ↗ multifamily tax exemption is valued at

1:15:58 ↗ about eight hundred forty thousand

1:15:59 ↗ dollars so again this is on the

1:16:02 ↗ residential portion of the Tod that we

1:16:05 ↗ will still collect during that 12 year

1:16:06 ↗ period property tax on the land and

1:16:09 ↗ property tax

1:16:10 ↗ the commercial space that is not a

1:16:12 ↗ nonprofit city and we will also collect

1:16:16 ↗ property taxes on the new location for

1:16:18 ↗ CenturyLink which is currently not it

1:16:21 ↗ was outside the city yeah we know what

1:16:24 ↗ that same collection would be from

1:16:27 ↗ CenturyLink do we know like what we

1:16:29 ↗ would collect total over those 12 years

1:16:32 ↗ if this project goes forward versus what

1:16:35 ↗ we would collect from CenturyLink if

1:16:37 ↗ nothing happened on that property yeah

1:16:39 ↗ CenturyLink over 12 years pays about

1:16:42 ↗ fifty nine thousand dollars about sixty

1:16:44 ↗ thousand dollars a year I'm sorry for

1:16:48 ↗ the full 12 years yeah that's the city's

1:16:52 ↗ portion of property tax yes so so for 12

1:16:55 ↗ years CenturyLink if we didn't do

1:16:56 ↗ anything we collect about $60,000 and

1:17:00 ↗ CenturyLink it's a utility and it's in

1:17:02 ↗ this good a little more detail but the

1:17:04 ↗ their assess their rate statewide as to

1:17:08 ↗ kind of ensure that there's continuity

1:17:10 ↗ between the different counties and then

1:17:12 ↗ kind of passed down through King County

1:17:13 ↗ so it doesn't you know it doesn't

1:17:16 ↗ fluctuate as much as some other

1:17:17 ↗ properties may it would be nice if we

1:17:19 ↗ could when we when this bill comes back

1:17:21 ↗ to put that up to show you know you've

1:17:24 ↗ mentioned it verbally a couple of times

1:17:26 ↗ the you know we would have taxes coming

1:17:29 ↗ in on the other pieces but it would

1:17:30 ↗ probably put a nice big exclamation

1:17:32 ↗ point on it to show it versus that 60

1:17:34 ↗ perfect will do and then so again as I

1:17:39 ↗ mentioned so the the top and the bottom

1:17:40 ↗ amounts the so the total is 4.4 million

1:17:43 ↗ dollars the 3.2 and the eight hundred

1:17:44 ↗ forty thousand dollars again are things

1:17:46 ↗ that are not cash out they are not

1:17:49 ↗ collected but as far as cash out so far

1:17:52 ↗ there's been three hundred thousand

1:17:54 ↗ dollars I put some notes at the bottom

1:17:56 ↗ of some points of interest and we can

1:17:58 ↗ dive into more this at a later time if

1:18:00 ↗ you're interested in hearing so for

1:18:02 ↗ every dollar the city is putting in

1:18:03 ↗ we're we're leveraging that with $36

1:18:08 ↗ from other investors and then also we're

1:18:10 ↗ looking at the city investment per

1:18:12 ↗ affordable unit and we calculated right

1:18:14 ↗ now at twenty five thousand dollars if

1:18:16 ↗ we get more units that'll course go down

1:18:18 ↗ and I looked at the city investments

1:18:20 ↗ we've made previously in the range that

1:18:22 ↗ we have had

1:18:23 ↗ we've subsidized other affordable

1:18:25 ↗ housing has been from 12,000 to 60,000

1:18:27 ↗ dollars so we're well in that range on

1:18:30 ↗ the lower end and if we actually have

1:18:32 ↗ some additional units that'll even go

1:18:35 ↗ down a little bit more yeah

1:18:37 ↗ councilmember Goodman thank you so for

1:18:39 ↗ the relocation site cost it says

1:18:41 ↗ purchase in a mediation short plat for a

1:18:44 ↗ portion of the King County Island is

1:18:46 ↗ that $300,000 that seems low if you so

1:18:49 ↗ we purchased the entire 20 acres for

1:18:52 ↗ seven hundred and sixty-five thousand

1:18:54 ↗ dollars and so the portion of that for

1:18:57 ↗ the 4.6 acres of the IC the intensive

1:19:02 ↗ commercial portion is in that the

1:19:04 ↗ remediation is completely for this site

1:19:06 ↗ and so that's about $150,000 and then

1:19:08 ↗ the short plat we're still kind of

1:19:10 ↗ totally met up so I want to say that's

1:19:12 ↗ probably ten fifteen thousand dollars so

1:19:15 ↗ what seems what seems missing from there

1:19:20 ↗ okay okay any other questions about our

1:19:23 ↗ investment to date okay so why are we

1:19:27 ↗ here so we have as Hal has mentioned as

1:19:33 ↗ the more we move along when the more we

1:19:35 ↗ learned when we have discovered a

1:19:38 ↗ funding gap in the actual entire project

1:19:41 ↗ the when we did the RFP we asked

1:19:44 ↗ respondents to use a plug figure of

1:19:46 ↗ three million dollars for a cost to

1:19:48 ↗ build a new facility for CenturyLink we

1:19:51 ↗ did not want each respondent to have a

1:19:53 ↗ different amount a different assumption

1:19:55 ↗ as they as we're trying to compare

1:19:57 ↗ proposals we use that we got that

1:20:00 ↗ estimate because we were provided the

1:20:03 ↗ model of what CenturyLink is currently

1:20:05 ↗ building in other parts of the country

1:20:07 ↗ for instance this one we received was

1:20:09 ↗ from Arizona it's about a 7,000 square

1:20:11 ↗ foot office and locker rooms and all the

1:20:13 ↗ cars were parked outside as we move

1:20:16 ↗ forward and we looked at what had

1:20:18 ↗ started to have a conversation with

1:20:20 ↗ CenturyLink they're interested in having

1:20:21 ↗ what they have here currently at their

1:20:24 ↗ site so currently at their site they

1:20:25 ↗ have a 35,000 square foot building where

1:20:28 ↗ they have office space of about 4,500

1:20:30 ↗ square feet and then have over 78

1:20:33 ↗ parking spaces into interior to their

1:20:36 ↗ building

1:20:36 ↗ park their their work vehicles and their

1:20:39 ↗ personal vehicles during the day we we

1:20:43 ↗ plan to have continued have some

1:20:45 ↗ conversation with Centrelink about if

1:20:46 ↗ that's possible how has gone around and

1:20:47 ↗ looked at other CenturyLink sites

1:20:49 ↗ throughout the region and none of them

1:20:50 ↗ have the full interior parking of other

1:20:52 ↗ vehicles so we believe there's some

1:20:54 ↗ leeway and negotiating with them about

1:20:57 ↗ that but for now this has this change

1:21:00 ↗ has resulted in a funding gap of four

1:21:03 ↗ million dollars in in the pro forma and

1:21:07 ↗ we have worked with the developer in

1:21:09 ↗ many different ways to address the

1:21:11 ↗ funding gap so as hal mentioned he's

1:21:14 ↗ redesigned the building three times

1:21:15 ↗ they're trying to find ways to to

1:21:17 ↗ maintain the amenities but to reduce the

1:21:19 ↗ cost and we also needed to gather more

1:21:22 ↗ information about what we needed so

1:21:24 ↗ tonight we're gonna address two of those

1:21:25 ↗ five RFP requirements of how we started

1:21:29 ↗ to address that and I'll address the

1:21:31 ↗ second one first so in the RFP we

1:21:33 ↗ requested a 2,000 square foot

1:21:34 ↗ residential assisted living cell and as

1:21:37 ↗ we started working more with our

1:21:39 ↗ development team King County Housing

1:21:40 ↗ Authority mentioned that there is a

1:21:42 ↗ source from the state that was coming

1:21:44 ↗ available that would actually be an

1:21:47 ↗ appropriate funding source for this and

1:21:50 ↗ they agreed to take the lead to apply

1:21:52 ↗ for that with our assistance but to

1:21:54 ↗ apply for that funding and actually

1:21:55 ↗ incorporate that those living units into

1:21:57 ↗ their building in a more cohesive

1:21:59 ↗ fashion so that reduced the gap by about

1:22:01 ↗ a million dollars if we get that funding

1:22:04 ↗ the other piece that we're gonna address

1:22:06 ↗ it and then we're here to talk to

1:22:07 ↗ tonight is the original requirement was

1:22:09 ↗ a 10,000 square foot ground-floor

1:22:11 ↗ commercial shell space for nonprofit

1:22:13 ↗ services so before again mentioned we

1:22:17 ↗ got we gathered more information we had

1:22:19 ↗ this idea in 2016 that we needed some

1:22:23 ↗ additional space for nonprofit services

1:22:25 ↗ but we didn't know if nonprofits that we

1:22:28 ↗ wanted that we're currently in the

1:22:29 ↗ community or wanted to be in the

1:22:30 ↗ community could actually pay for those

1:22:32 ↗ space and how much that would be so we

1:22:34 ↗ did an RFP which we were to talk about

1:22:36 ↗ tonight to better understand what the

1:22:38 ↗ the interests and also the the ability

1:22:41 ↗ for tenants to pay for this because

1:22:44 ↗ again we we understood that there's

1:22:46 ↗ gonna be some additional cost for this

1:22:48 ↗ space or we want to make sure we covered

1:22:50 ↗ for this space and so we were pleasantly

1:22:53 ↗ surprised we had and David will talk

1:22:54 ↗ more about the RFP responses but we we

1:22:57 ↗ had needed to gather gather that

1:22:59 ↗ information so that we could come to an

1:23:01 ↗ understanding that there was desire for

1:23:04 ↗ ten thousand square feet so obviously if

1:23:06 ↗ there wasn't then we would have be

1:23:07 ↗ having a different conversation any

1:23:10 ↗ questions to this point okay oh yeah

1:23:14 ↗ okay so tonight we're gonna be

1:23:17 ↗ discussing three options and I wanted to

1:23:19 ↗ make it clear that the options that you

1:23:23 ↗ see here are for the unfinished shell

1:23:26 ↗ and so we know that there will be tenant

1:23:28 ↗ improvement costs and after receiving

1:23:31 ↗ direction from the council in which

1:23:33 ↗ which user type of use and size we will

1:23:36 ↗ work with the nonprofit to better define

1:23:39 ↗ what that contribution and that sharing

1:23:42 ↗ of cost is for the tenant improvements

1:23:43 ↗ we always intended that that would be a

1:23:45 ↗ shared cost or potentially full cost for

1:23:47 ↗ the tenants we don't have that exact

1:23:51 ↗ figure for tonight but what we need to

1:23:52 ↗ again get direction on is what the city

1:23:54 ↗ is willing to do for these different

1:23:58 ↗ options so the three options tonight are

1:24:00 ↗ to maintain this 10,000 square foot

1:24:02 ↗ again to look at for the the nonprofit

1:24:06 ↗ service providers to be to provide it so

1:24:08 ↗ that's the original proposal if it's

1:24:10 ↗ going to be at a commercial use through

1:24:14 ↗ our RFP process we did identify a user

1:24:16 ↗ that isn't very interested and that's

1:24:18 ↗ the medical use and that's a 2.8 million

1:24:20 ↗ dollar gap the difference between the

1:24:22 ↗ 2.3 and 2.8 is the additional

1:24:24 ↗ infrastructure difference acquired for a

1:24:26 ↗ medical user and then the third option

1:24:28 ↗ is to reduce to 3000 square foot plus a

1:24:31 ↗ thousand square feet of shared space and

1:24:33 ↗ we do have some interest from a non

1:24:34 ↗ profit for that and we'd have to

1:24:36 ↗ identify other services to collocate

1:24:38 ↗ with them and there's no additional

1:24:39 ↗ costs for the shell but there would be

1:24:41 ↗ potentially for the tenant improvements

1:24:43 ↗ what's when you say three thousand

1:24:45 ↗ square feet plus a thousand screed it's

1:24:47 ↗ a thousand square feet of shared space

1:24:48 ↗ yeah

1:24:49 ↗ what's the shared space yeah so one of

1:24:51 ↗ the one of the concepts and this is

1:24:52 ↗ again isn't set in stone either is one

1:24:54 ↗ of the concepts that we heard in the and

1:24:56 ↗ the application are the RFP interviews

1:24:59 ↗ was a desire to have meeting space

1:25:02 ↗ that's a little larger for

1:25:03 ↗ for the nonprofit's to utilize and so

1:25:07 ↗ Hal and we're working and talking to his

1:25:10 ↗ other tenants recognize that the kidney

1:25:12 ↗ center also needed a space where would

1:25:15 ↗ be a teaching kitchen have a space for

1:25:17 ↗ for meetings and such so the way it's

1:25:19 ↗ designed at this moment is that's the

1:25:21 ↗ shared with the other users on you know

1:25:23 ↗ on the site so again that's not

1:25:26 ↗ solidified our decisions been made but

1:25:28 ↗ that's the proposal as now yeah so again

1:25:32 ↗ tonight we are hoping that we will

1:25:35 ↗ receive some direction from the four of

1:25:37 ↗ you regarding the type of nonprofit

1:25:38 ↗ surface service and also the acceptable

1:25:41 ↗ investment david is going to dive into a

1:25:45 ↗ little bit more details with the

1:25:46 ↗ Opportunity Center that process and the

1:25:48 ↗ details any questions for me before I

1:25:50 ↗ yep councilmember hunt thank you on the

1:25:55 ↗ last slide the so reducing to 3,000 plus

1:25:59 ↗ the 1,000 shares so that that's a

1:26:02 ↗ difference of 7,000 square feet between

1:26:05 ↗ option two and three and so would that

1:26:09 ↗ be what would be the plan for that 7,000

1:26:12 ↗ would be another commercial meaning if

1:26:17 ↗ the Opportunity Center was not was not

1:26:20 ↗ built to the 4,000 what the other seven

1:26:23 ↗ thousand would be so the layout will be

1:26:24 ↗ different and you'll see that on the

1:26:26 ↗ slides and the so there's a lot of

1:26:29 ↗ different changes so like the the

1:26:30 ↗ parking that were required for that then

1:26:32 ↗ would be reallocated or not needed to be

1:26:34 ↗ found in other locations I know there's

1:26:36 ↗ other aspects but the layout would be a

1:26:38 ↗ different format there yeah

1:26:43 ↗ can I ask City Administrator moon

1:26:47 ↗ regardless of what the money goes for in

1:26:53 ↗ other words which these options we feel

1:26:54 ↗ has vowed community value at how much

1:26:56 ↗ the most expensive is 2.8 million

1:26:59 ↗ dollars do we have an idea how we would

1:27:02 ↗ fund that if we move forward with that

1:27:04 ↗ option I think Jen has actually had some

1:27:09 ↗ discussions with the finance director

1:27:11 ↗ and finance director feels fairly

1:27:13 ↗ confident that there

1:27:14 ↗ a couple different ways that we could go

1:27:16 ↗ about providing that amount and do you

1:27:20 ↗ want to elaborate yes so there are some

1:27:22 ↗ end of fund balance options there's also

1:27:27 ↗ looking at bonding we have the capacity

1:27:29 ↗ to bond and one of the things with this

1:27:31 ↗ opportunity Center investment is that

1:27:35 ↗ you will be receiving annual rent or

1:27:39 ↗ lease income so that at this moment we

1:27:42 ↗ believe that that would cover the bond

1:27:43 ↗ payments and/or pay you know pay into

1:27:45 ↗ future opportunities and I think there's

1:27:49 ↗ a larger discussion that's going to be

1:27:51 ↗ happening to counsel about investment of

1:27:53 ↗ city dollars but this isn't okay one

1:27:57 ↗ more thing before we move on

1:27:59 ↗ so there's bonding there's ending fund

1:28:02 ↗ balances and there's also other funds

1:28:05 ↗ right like I'm thinking specifically of

1:28:07 ↗ the nine hundred and sixty five thousand

1:28:09 ↗ dollars that we have in the human

1:28:10 ↗ services fund that came from Tallis that

1:28:13 ↗ we have not spent yet that would be

1:28:15 ↗ neither bonds nor ending fund balance

1:28:17 ↗ are there other is there other coins and

1:28:21 ↗ the cushions that we couldn't look for

1:28:23 ↗ you've identified the three primary

1:28:25 ↗ sources that we have also talked about

1:28:29 ↗ okay yeah Thank You councilmember

1:28:32 ↗ Goodman thank you the two point three

1:28:34 ↗ and two point eight funding required for

1:28:36 ↗ unfinished shell is that the tell me

1:28:39 ↗ more about is that the city's portion or

1:28:41 ↗ is that with the tenant be paying for

1:28:45 ↗ some of the improvements or so the

1:28:48 ↗ unfinished cell would be the city's

1:28:50 ↗ commitment if we're going to maintain

1:28:53 ↗ ownership if we would look at

1:28:56 ↗ potentially future lease to own options

1:28:59 ↗ and that we obviously be covered through

1:29:01 ↗ that but the tenant improvement so the

1:29:03 ↗ shell is going to give you the concrete

1:29:06 ↗ cement look you know of a build out with

1:29:09 ↗ stubs for plumbing and and other things

1:29:12 ↗ electricity but the tenant improvements

1:29:14 ↗ to actually build out the space walls

1:29:17 ↗ and other things carpet that's the

1:29:20 ↗ that's the piece that we would then

1:29:21 ↗ after Direction received from the

1:29:23 ↗ council go negotiate that next step so

1:29:26 ↗ the funding required for unfinished

1:29:28 ↗ shell the difference between the three

1:29:29 ↗ is it what is required to be in the

1:29:33 ↗ 10,000 square foot spaces to the

1:29:36 ↗ unfinished degree it's just more costly

1:29:41 ↗ why is there no I mean if it's all it's

1:29:45 ↗ the funding gap that we partially the

1:29:47 ↗ funding gap that we identified earlier

1:29:49 ↗ with the difference in cost so when they

1:29:51 ↗ created their pro forma they assumed one

1:29:53 ↗ thing and we now found that that's a

1:29:54 ↗ more costly thing so in order to still

1:29:57 ↗ provide the 10,000 square foot there

1:29:59 ↗ needs to be an investment to bring that

1:30:01 ↗ gap down and we again reduce that gap

1:30:03 ↗ from 4.4 million dollars to these

1:30:06 ↗ figures here before tonight sure I

1:30:12 ↗ understand you identified a four million

1:30:15 ↗ dollar gap yes so where does the plus

1:30:18 ↗ million fit in so we worked other ways

1:30:21 ↗ to reduce the funding gap so one of

1:30:24 ↗ those ways was for King County to find

1:30:26 ↗ funding for one of our requirements so

1:30:27 ↗ that reduce it about two million dollars

1:30:29 ↗ the other way we did some adjustments to

1:30:31 ↗ the to the design for and we also are

1:30:34 ↗ not paying for our portion each of these

1:30:37 ↗ owners quote-unquote we would be an

1:30:39 ↗ owner of the site are going to be

1:30:41 ↗ condominium condominium owners we

1:30:44 ↗ actually reduced the land value of that

1:30:47 ↗ they were kind enough to say oh you know

1:30:48 ↗ what this we don't need to charge you

1:30:50 ↗ the land portion of this so there's been

1:30:52 ↗ some give-and-take with the developer

1:30:54 ↗ that we've already had to get it down to

1:30:56 ↗ 2.3 million dollars for the 10,000

1:30:58 ↗ square feet or if we wanted to do the

1:31:00 ↗ medical user it's 2.8 because of

1:31:02 ↗ additional infrastructure that needed to

1:31:05 ↗ be installed prior to the tenant

1:31:07 ↗ improvements so we're not asking for the

1:31:11 ↗ full four we did some work to get it

1:31:12 ↗ down and now we're here to say are you

1:31:14 ↗ willing and interested in investing in

1:31:17 ↗ one of these options

1:31:18 ↗ I was a member fund thank you so I think

1:31:23 ↗ that what would be really helpful for

1:31:25 ↗ the next meeting for me would be a table

1:31:28 ↗ with this information with the gap and

1:31:30 ↗ then you identified the one that 1

1:31:33 ↗ million for the the

1:31:36 ↗ and the assisted living space and then

1:31:41 ↗ you have these other options that will

1:31:43 ↗ close the gap and and and what would be

1:31:46 ↗ needed so I think that in a table form

1:31:48 ↗ that would be really helpful and just

1:31:50 ↗ show how it adds up and then you can

1:31:52 ↗ also put in the additional information

1:31:53 ↗ that you just shared about how that gap

1:31:56 ↗ has caused Thanks thank you other

1:31:59 ↗ questions all right

1:32:01 ↗ okay we're gonna get details thank you

1:32:10 ↗ David Fujimoto director of the Office of

1:32:13 ↗ Sustainability and we'll return to those

1:32:16 ↗ slides again at the end of this really

1:32:18 ↗ again just to kind of reinforce where

1:32:20 ↗ we're essentially problem solving for

1:32:22 ↗ that gap so the original RFP originally

1:32:25 ↗ had stated a 10,000 square-foot space

1:32:27 ↗ for nonprofit services who discovered a

1:32:30 ↗ number of things as we progress through

1:32:31 ↗ kind of the discovery process

1:32:33 ↗ understanding excite conditions and a

1:32:35 ↗ variety of different parameters

1:32:36 ↗ understanding differences in costs and

1:32:38 ↗ so that's what has led us to this this

1:32:40 ↗ gap that we're trying to achieve

1:32:42 ↗ so rewinding just a little bit and

1:32:44 ↗ talking about the opportunity center the

1:32:47 ↗ whole nexus or the whole origination for

1:32:49 ↗ the opportunity center as a part of the

1:32:51 ↗ overall Century Link Tod project was to

1:32:55 ↗ find innovate innovative ways to help

1:32:57 ↗ address community needs by providing

1:32:59 ↗ nonprofit services in our community you

1:33:02 ↗ know one of the most significant

1:33:03 ↗ barriers that we've identified to

1:33:05 ↗ providing services locally it's really

1:33:07 ↗ been the affordability of facilities in

1:33:09 ↗ the high cost of land that we're finding

1:33:11 ↗ in Issaquah this has some roots back to

1:33:13 ↗ a former project which was the Human

1:33:15 ↗ Services campus there was some work done

1:33:18 ↗ by a community group that was working

1:33:20 ↗ together with the together center out of

1:33:22 ↗ Redmond they were looking at benefits of

1:33:24 ↗ a co-located human services type model

1:33:27 ↗ they showed the importance of low market

1:33:30 ↗ rents to being able to make that

1:33:31 ↗ feasible and they identified a range of

1:33:34 ↗ services that they felt weren't needed

1:33:36 ↗ in the community this project is not

1:33:38 ↗ attempting to replicate that but it is

1:33:40 ↗ drawing from pieces of that as well as

1:33:43 ↗ some worked on a community needs

1:33:44 ↗ assessment which is more recent and

1:33:46 ↗ speaks more specifically to human

1:33:49 ↗ services needs

1:33:50 ↗ but ultimately the purpose of the

1:33:52 ↗ opportunity center is to as it says here

1:33:54 ↗ to expand services locally or to enhance

1:33:57 ↗ them we're really looking at this as an

1:34:00 ↗ opportunity to increase the services to

1:34:02 ↗ the community not just relocate existing

1:34:05 ↗ services we want to try and address some

1:34:06 ↗ of those needs that were identified in

1:34:08 ↗ the community needs assessment and also

1:34:11 ↗ with that reducing some of those service

1:34:12 ↗ access issues there were a number of

1:34:14 ↗ those that were identified to the

1:34:16 ↗ community needs assessment

1:34:17 ↗ transportation being primary also some

1:34:20 ↗ system navigation related issues

1:34:22 ↗ culturally relevant services things like

1:34:24 ↗ that as Jen had mentioned in order to

1:34:31 ↗ help us get more information about

1:34:33 ↗ potential tenants and what their

1:34:35 ↗ criteria would be we developed a request

1:34:38 ↗ for proposals back in the fall of last

1:34:40 ↗ year leading up to that work we actually

1:34:43 ↗ did some work have some pre-planning and

1:34:45 ↗ investigative work so that we would have

1:34:48 ↗ a better sense of what to look for out

1:34:50 ↗ in the communities so we did some

1:34:52 ↗ interviews with some Human Services

1:34:53 ↗ agencies we talked to her with our Human

1:34:56 ↗ Services Commission we did a survey of a

1:34:58 ↗ number of agencies that were operating

1:35:00 ↗ in the region to get a sense of what

1:35:01 ↗ their plans were what were the needs

1:35:03 ↗ they were seeing what services they were

1:35:05 ↗ providing in Issaquah and we've heard

1:35:07 ↗ back a range of things we heard that

1:35:09 ↗ everything from we just need a space for

1:35:12 ↗ staff to be able to locate and kind of

1:35:14 ↗ hotel when they're here in Issaquah all

1:35:17 ↗ the way up to interest in citing a

1:35:19 ↗ satellite location relocating a main

1:35:22 ↗ office or providing additional new

1:35:25 ↗ services in our community so we heard a

1:35:27 ↗ range of services something from very

1:35:29 ↗ small to much more kind of robust

1:35:31 ↗ options so this helped us to identify a

1:35:34 ↗ variety of kind of types of services and

1:35:36 ↗ types of spaces that could be located so

1:35:38 ↗ this was also office space classrooms

1:35:41 ↗ training centers a range of kind of

1:35:45 ↗ medical service providers counseling

1:35:47 ↗ services and things like that we let

1:35:51 ↗ this request for a proposal in the fall

1:35:52 ↗ and we received four proposals which

1:35:55 ↗ you'll see here the first was kind of

1:35:58 ↗ this consortium involving at work with

1:36:00 ↗ encompass life enrichment options tab on

1:36:03 ↗ Learning Center and Friends

1:36:04 ↗ youth and they came together with a kind

1:36:07 ↗ of overall joint proposal primarily

1:36:09 ↗ focused on services for youth and young

1:36:12 ↗ adults with developmental disabilities

1:36:14 ↗ it also included some pediatric therapy

1:36:17 ↗ for children with developmental delays

1:36:18 ↗ and then some youth behavioral services

1:36:21 ↗ and homeless outreach services primarily

1:36:25 ↗ through Friends of youth for this

1:36:28 ↗ proposal all but encompass currently

1:36:31 ↗ have operations in Issaquah encompass

1:36:33 ↗ operates out of North Bend so this would

1:36:35 ↗ be a kind of an extension or potentially

1:36:37 ↗ relocation of services in the case of

1:36:39 ↗ that work and have on elsewhere within

1:36:41 ↗ the community they had requested a full

1:36:44 ↗ 10,000 square feet for as a part of the

1:36:46 ↗ proposal as a part of the process of

1:36:51 ↗ working with them became clear they're

1:36:53 ↗ still developing some site concepts for

1:36:55 ↗ this use they were discussing issues

1:36:58 ↗ like a retail space a coffee shop

1:37:01 ↗ potentially having a commercial kitchen

1:37:02 ↗ on site a little bit of lack of clarity

1:37:05 ↗ on leasing requirements and kind of a

1:37:10 ↗ very low range $4 per square foot

1:37:12 ↗ interest in ability to provide for lease

1:37:17 ↗ the next one was a organization called

1:37:19 ↗ icrons-- they're a smaller behavioral

1:37:22 ↗ health provider they have locations

1:37:24 ↗ currently in Bellevue and Seattle no

1:37:27 ↗ current locations in this acqua this

1:37:29 ↗ came in as a singular proposal they were

1:37:31 ↗ looking for about 1,200 to 2,500 square

1:37:34 ↗ feet

1:37:35 ↗ they provide outpatient mental health

1:37:37 ↗ services psychiatric medication

1:37:39 ↗ management care coordination some

1:37:42 ↗ employment services for youth and adults

1:37:44 ↗ and young adults as well and there are a

1:37:47 ↗ smaller organization I think their total

1:37:49 ↗ financial annual budget is on the order

1:37:53 ↗ of 2.2 million versus that first group

1:37:56 ↗ which is more close or closer at about

1:37:57 ↗ 24 million per year combined so they had

1:38:01 ↗ pretty limited capacity for tenant

1:38:03 ↗ improvements and really needed to have

1:38:05 ↗ kind of some pre furnished spaces in

1:38:07 ↗ order to expand their operations locally

1:38:09 ↗ into Issaquah the next one was a

1:38:12 ↗ combination of Valley cities and a

1:38:14 ↗ health point they currently operate in

1:38:16 ↗ multiple locations in

1:38:18 ↗ South County as well as Redmond

1:38:21 ↗ locations

1:38:22 ↗ Renton as well they don't currently have

1:38:25 ↗ an issue qual location but our servant

1:38:27 ↗ has Choir residents and they had

1:38:28 ↗ requested a full 10,000 square feet as

1:38:31 ↗ part of their proposal process Valley

1:38:33 ↗ cities as was noted previously provides

1:38:35 ↗ for behavioral health services to both

1:38:37 ↗ mental health services as well as

1:38:39 ↗ substance use disorder related services

1:38:41 ↗ and health point provides comprehensive

1:38:43 ↗ medical and dental services both of

1:38:46 ↗ these agencies provide services to

1:38:48 ↗ primarily low-income households about

1:38:51 ↗ 93% of clients for Valley cities make

1:38:53 ↗ less than $17,000 per year and about 96

1:38:57 ↗ percent of clients for health point are

1:38:59 ↗ around or below 200% of the poverty

1:39:01 ↗ level which is about I think believe

1:39:03 ↗ it's around $24,000 per year so

1:39:05 ↗ definitely low income spectrum of the

1:39:07 ↗ health of communities what's interesting

1:39:10 ↗ about their proposal is the Medicaid

1:39:12 ↗ system Medicare system is definitely

1:39:14 ↗ moving to an integrative care system

1:39:16 ↗ where they're integrating both

1:39:18 ↗ behavioral and physical health services

1:39:20 ↗ all under one roof kind of a whole body

1:39:22 ↗ care approach and they're actually ahead

1:39:24 ↗ of the game so they've actually started

1:39:26 ↗ to do this work and they have

1:39:27 ↗ partnerships and providing that kind of

1:39:29 ↗ approach with their facilities and

1:39:31 ↗ working together financially these

1:39:35 ↗ organizations are much more significant

1:39:37 ↗ they're on the order of about a hundred

1:39:39 ↗ and thirty eight million dollars

1:39:41 ↗ operating revenue or budget on an annual

1:39:45 ↗ basis they are able to pay for leasing

1:39:50 ↗ arrangements and can participate in

1:39:52 ↗ tenant improvements the last one is hope

1:39:56 ↗ link hope link is also a fairly large

1:39:59 ↗ large organization at about 14 service

1:40:01 ↗ locations in the King County area they

1:40:04 ↗ don't have a current Issaquah location

1:40:06 ↗ they were looking for a smaller

1:40:07 ↗ footprint for their operations typically

1:40:10 ↗ they operate both a food bank and then

1:40:12 ↗ some stability services that go along

1:40:14 ↗ with it because Issaquah has a food bank

1:40:17 ↗ they wouldn't choose to cite that kind

1:40:19 ↗ of a facility here but they would work

1:40:20 ↗ in partnership with an organization like

1:40:22 ↗ the food bank so they were looking at

1:40:25 ↗ maybe about 1,400 - I think up to 1,800

1:40:28 ↗ square feet so again a smaller footprint

1:40:30 ↗ mostly kind of council

1:40:32 ↗ make services some training spaces areas

1:40:35 ↗ like that as I mentioned before

1:40:37 ↗ providing for financial resilience

1:40:40 ↗ energy assistance Family Development

1:40:42 ↗ Employment Services and adult education

1:40:46 ↗ organizationally there are at about 62

1:40:48 ↗ million in terms of a total budget so as

1:40:51 ↗ a part of the review of these proposals

1:40:53 ↗ we took a look at several different

1:40:56 ↗ things we looked at service need and

1:40:57 ↗ delivery shared and supportive functions

1:41:00 ↗ this kind of goes back to that idea that

1:41:02 ↗ we heard that some of the nonprofit's

1:41:04 ↗ wanted to work together and potentially

1:41:06 ↗ shares spaces some smaller organizations

1:41:09 ↗ such as was proposed in that first

1:41:11 ↗ consortium could band together and

1:41:14 ↗ provide some services we also looked at

1:41:17 ↗ alignment with the overall Tod project

1:41:19 ↗ site to make sure that there were

1:41:21 ↗ compatible uses and that there were some

1:41:22 ↗ opportunities for actually leveraging

1:41:24 ↗ services we looked at the the

1:41:27 ↗ organizational capacity but also

1:41:29 ↗ alignment and whether or not the

1:41:31 ↗ organization's who were proposing had

1:41:33 ↗ Itzik Wanda radar or whether this was

1:41:35 ↗ just an opportunistic kind of shot in

1:41:38 ↗ the dark so we looked at that we also

1:41:40 ↗ considered whether it advance equity and

1:41:43 ↗ sustainability and economic vitality as

1:41:45 ↗ part of their proposals as well and then

1:41:47 ↗ any special needs that they might have

1:41:49 ↗ because of their specific site or

1:41:51 ↗ service requirements and we also when

1:41:57 ↗ we're reviewing these proposals

1:41:59 ↗ we included staff from the mayor's

1:42:01 ↗ office we had an economic development

1:42:03 ↗ office of sustainability involved in

1:42:06 ↗ that work both spectrum and King County

1:42:09 ↗ Housing Authority sat in on the

1:42:11 ↗ interviews and then we had a

1:42:12 ↗ representative from the Eastside Human

1:42:14 ↗ Services forum as well as our chair from

1:42:16 ↗ the Human Services Commission sit in on

1:42:18 ↗ those interviews as a part of that work

1:42:22 ↗ the city administration identified

1:42:24 ↗ health point in Valley cities as a

1:42:25 ↗ leading proposal because they expand

1:42:28 ↗ services to the community there are new

1:42:30 ↗ services they're not currently provided

1:42:32 ↗ within our community

1:42:34 ↗ it was addressing this priority service

1:42:36 ↗ need that we had identified in the

1:42:37 ↗ community needs assessment and it

1:42:40 ↗ improved access by bringing a service to

1:42:42 ↗ Issaquah so that was really addressing

1:42:44 ↗ if

1:42:45 ↗ low-income households aren't able to

1:42:47 ↗ find service health services locally

1:42:48 ↗ they really have to go outside of our

1:42:50 ↗ community we know that transportation is

1:42:52 ↗ a significant barriers to bring that

1:42:54 ↗ service to the community was seen as a

1:42:56 ↗ positive benefit and then also we

1:43:01 ↗ identified that they have a strong

1:43:04 ↗ financial position and the ability to

1:43:07 ↗ pay for lease so going into a few of the

1:43:11 ↗ options as Jen had noted before we've

1:43:14 ↗ really laid out three different options

1:43:16 ↗ offer up operating from the premise that

1:43:19 ↗ within the original RFP with the for the

1:43:23 ↗ project as a whole for the Tod site it

1:43:27 ↗ had come out with the goal of 10,000

1:43:29 ↗ square feet of an unfinished space so

1:43:31 ↗ this first option really keeps with that

1:43:33 ↗ that approach and says ok so if we were

1:43:35 ↗ to maintain that goal of 10,000 square

1:43:38 ↗ feet what would be required for

1:43:39 ↗ investment to address that gap that's

1:43:41 ↗ been identified excuse me

1:43:43 ↗ and so that's really this 2.3 million in

1:43:46 ↗ investment for the shell we did see some

1:43:49 ↗ services we just received two proposals

1:43:52 ↗ that were interested in the full 10,000

1:43:54 ↗ square feet one was the at work

1:43:56 ↗ consortium and the other was the health

1:43:57 ↗ point which we'll talk about is the next

1:43:59 ↗ option as well and then as we just spoke

1:44:02 ↗ about in terms of financially the city

1:44:04 ↗ does have some options for how we would

1:44:06 ↗ approach this we can put forth

1:44:09 ↗ essentially cash towards a project we do

1:44:11 ↗ have the ability to finance and talking

1:44:13 ↗ to our finance director generals and we

1:44:16 ↗ don't have a limitation on a bonding

1:44:18 ↗ capacity it's really a cash flow

1:44:19 ↗ question so that's not a consideration

1:44:22 ↗ so in a way it's a little bit of a

1:44:23 ↗ different equation because we do have

1:44:25 ↗ the potential for gaining revenue as a

1:44:27 ↗ result of this project so it is more

1:44:29 ↗ feasible if from that standpoint likely

1:44:33 ↗ also commercially viable from that

1:44:35 ↗ capacity simple payback on some of those

1:44:38 ↗ investments would be on the range of 10

1:44:39 ↗ to 12 years

1:44:46 ↗ let's see so that's option one option

1:44:48 ↗ two this is really where with getting

1:44:52 ↗ more specifics as a result of the RFP

1:44:54 ↗ process we understand for medical and

1:44:57 ↗ dental services provided on site there's

1:45:00 ↗ different infrastructure requirements

1:45:01 ↗ this in part relates to the construction

1:45:04 ↗ practice or construction methods that

1:45:06 ↗ are necessary in order to provide for

1:45:08 ↗ the additional plumbing ventilation and

1:45:10 ↗ other requirements and so that does add

1:45:13 ↗ about five hundred thousand dollars to

1:45:14 ↗ the cost for the corn shell to be

1:45:17 ↗ developed at this option and it also

1:45:24 ↗ requires is so the more specialized

1:45:26 ↗ planning for that build-out and of that

1:45:28 ↗ ventilation and because of their the

1:45:32 ↗ interest in this in working with that

1:45:35 ↗ partner there is some potential interest

1:45:37 ↗ in long term ownership that's so that's

1:45:39 ↗ something that we can also consider as

1:45:41 ↗ well whether they can make some

1:45:42 ↗ investments over time we're potentially

1:45:44 ↗ in a lease-to-own arrangement and one of

1:45:48 ↗ the pieces that still to be sorted out

1:45:50 ↗ with this option is considering the

1:45:52 ↗ parking requirements and what needs will

1:45:55 ↗ be necessary on-site as well as through

1:45:57 ↗ some of the adjacent sites in order to

1:45:59 ↗ make sure that we have sufficient

1:46:00 ↗ parking to make to meet the demands of

1:46:02 ↗ this service and as I mentioned before

1:46:05 ↗ Health Point has indicated an interest

1:46:08 ↗ in and ability to contribute to tenant

1:46:11 ↗ improvements the third option was

1:46:15 ↗ pursuing an Avenue where instead of

1:46:18 ↗ maintaining the square footage allowance

1:46:20 ↗ was more focused on the part about

1:46:23 ↗ providing space to the city at no cost

1:46:25 ↗ which was a secondary requirement for an

1:46:28 ↗ additional requirement for the

1:46:29 ↗ Opportunity Center part of the Tod RFP

1:46:32 ↗ and so this was the results of some

1:46:36 ↗ problem-solving and part of the

1:46:38 ↗ developer to figure out how could we

1:46:40 ↗ make that work it does result in a

1:46:42 ↗ reduced footprint about three thousand

1:46:43 ↗ square feet plus this one thousand

1:46:45 ↗ square feet of shared spaces this does

1:46:47 ↗ change the dynamic on the user types

1:46:50 ↗ that we can accommodate in this space

1:46:51 ↗ most likely the strongest candidate

1:46:55 ↗ would be something like a hope link

1:46:56 ↗ which can provide for some of these

1:46:58 ↗ finance

1:46:59 ↗ stability stability services and

1:47:00 ↗ employment services we do know that they

1:47:03 ↗ wouldn't necessarily want that full

1:47:05 ↗ space so we would need to either work

1:47:07 ↗ with them to think about how they might

1:47:09 ↗ be able to provide some management some

1:47:12 ↗ additional space and allow other

1:47:14 ↗ nonprofit users to use it or potentially

1:47:16 ↗ find a secondary user so back to this

1:47:23 ↗ chart as we've talked through there are

1:47:27 ↗ some key pieces about size and services

1:47:30 ↗ and cost really some of those those

1:47:33 ↗ issues about size do tie to some of the

1:47:35 ↗ services and the ability to meet certain

1:47:38 ↗ services the 10,000 square foot space

1:47:43 ↗ without an identity and identify tenant

1:47:46 ↗ at least at this point in time is

1:47:47 ↗ potentially the highest risk because we

1:47:49 ↗ don't have a guaranteed revenue stream

1:47:51 ↗ that would or we certainly we don't have

1:47:53 ↗ a guarantee but we don't have an

1:47:54 ↗ identified revenue stream or partner as

1:47:57 ↗ released as a result of our process to

1:47:59 ↗ date that could use that space for the

1:48:02 ↗ ten thousand square feet link to

1:48:03 ↗ healthcare provider it's primarily an

1:48:06 ↗ investment risk it's a question of

1:48:09 ↗ having potentially a strong known

1:48:11 ↗ partner financially who can provide for

1:48:13 ↗ some resources to contribute to the

1:48:16 ↗ project but there are as some additional

1:48:19 ↗ costs for build-out and there are some

1:48:23 ↗ additional requirements for the city in

1:48:24 ↗ terms of its property management

1:48:26 ↗ responsibilities the city yes on the on

1:48:29 ↗ the first option didn't you say at work

1:48:32 ↗ was potentially what was the issue that

1:48:34 ↗ works suggestion of ten thousand oh

1:48:37 ↗ thank you so at work who was requesting

1:48:39 ↗ the full ten thousand square feet one of

1:48:41 ↗ the the concerns was that their their

1:48:44 ↗ plan for the use of the space was not

1:48:46 ↗ fully fleshed out and that's something

1:48:48 ↗ that did come out in the interviews and

1:48:50 ↗ through some follow-up conversations

1:48:52 ↗ with them we were concerned about what

1:48:54 ↗ the structure of that arrangement would

1:48:56 ↗ look like thank you and also since that

1:48:59 ↗ time encompass has also identified an

1:49:01 ↗ alternative location for their services

1:49:02 ↗ in the community so we're not we don't

1:49:05 ↗ believe that that lease in that prior

1:49:06 ↗ configuration is a salad option

1:49:10 ↗ thank you for clarifying so and then so

1:49:15 ↗ the ten thousand square feet for the

1:49:17 ↗ health care provider good finance strong

1:49:20 ↗ financial partner can contribute

1:49:22 ↗ additional cost for build-out some

1:49:25 ↗ additional responsibilities in terms of

1:49:27 ↗ city property management we do provide

1:49:29 ↗ that capacity on other city properties

1:49:32 ↗ this is maybe a little bit of a

1:49:33 ↗ different equation and but at the same

1:49:36 ↗ time it may be the best option for

1:49:38 ↗ bringing these types of services to our

1:49:39 ↗ community yes just speak to those

1:49:43 ↗ additional city property management

1:49:46 ↗ considerations

1:49:47 ↗ sure and I'll ask Emily to join in here

1:49:52 ↗ as well so the city does provide for

1:49:54 ↗ property management responsibilities is

1:49:56 ↗ on a number of sites both on facilities

1:49:58 ↗ that we own as well as ones that we

1:50:00 ↗ lease to tenants and there's a variety

1:50:03 ↗ of different flavors of that if you will

1:50:05 ↗ we do provide leases to nonprofit

1:50:07 ↗ organizations such as at work or to the

1:50:12 ↗ food and clothing bank we also have some

1:50:14 ↗ commercial spaces that we lease this is

1:50:17 ↗ a newer property that will have some

1:50:20 ↗ higher financial obligations associated

1:50:22 ↗ with it and it just would need to make

1:50:24 ↗ sure that we've got the capacity to

1:50:26 ↗ provide oversight on that sorry yeah so

1:50:31 ↗ we'd be the landlord so we would just

1:50:35 ↗ need to work out what does that mean

1:50:37 ↗ we'd have to work out a particular deal

1:50:39 ↗ you know which which are tenant

1:50:41 ↗ requirements and which are the landlord

1:50:43 ↗ requirements Thanks I can shed some

1:50:48 ↗ light on that the the Opportunity Center

1:50:50 ↗ regardless of the size will be you know

1:50:53 ↗ a small piece of the big project and we

1:50:54 ↗ will have a property manager on site and

1:50:57 ↗ each tenant will pay for their

1:50:59 ↗ proportionate share of the sidewalk

1:51:01 ↗ sweeping and the the mechanical

1:51:04 ↗ equipment maintenance and those are

1:51:05 ↗ things that we will want to control as

1:51:07 ↗ the landlord of the overall project

1:51:08 ↗ where the Sheridan you know with the

1:51:11 ↗ insurance so I would for resources of

1:51:13 ↗ the city I think it would have a much

1:51:14 ↗ diminished strain on your resources

1:51:17 ↗ because that property management really

1:51:18 ↗ wants to be handled by one firm for the

1:51:20 ↗ entire project not broken up with a

1:51:21 ↗ bunch of different

1:51:23 ↗ pretty managers you know doing each

1:51:24 ↗ little space you great and then

1:51:31 ↗ continuing to that third option the

1:51:34 ↗ reduced space at 3,000 4,000 square feet

1:51:37 ↗ probably the lowest risk and no

1:51:38 ↗ additional financial investment on the

1:51:40 ↗ city's part there as was discussed

1:51:44 ↗ before there's potential for tenant

1:51:45 ↗ improvements there is a known partner

1:51:48 ↗ potential partner with a strong

1:51:49 ↗ financial position but a different

1:51:52 ↗ variety of services that could be

1:51:54 ↗ operated out of that space additional

1:51:57 ↗ partner or use of that space would need

1:51:59 ↗ to be identified and there yeah I guess

1:52:06 ↗ so there's some unknowns about that

1:52:07 ↗ those services that would be provided

1:52:09 ↗ the other piece to that is we do also

1:52:12 ↗ know that hopefully has a strong

1:52:14 ↗ interest in coming to Ezra kua they've

1:52:16 ↗ identified a service location in their

1:52:18 ↗ strategic plan they have been actively

1:52:21 ↗ pursuing locations in Issaquah and in

1:52:23 ↗ fact how to identify two previous a

1:52:25 ↗ different site in Issaquah that didn't

1:52:27 ↗ pan out so there's a chance that they

1:52:29 ↗ will be able to find some location in

1:52:31 ↗ Issaquah through that avenues or other

1:52:34 ↗ avenues as well so with that did you

1:52:38 ↗ want to wrap up or do you want take

1:52:40 ↗ additional questions at this point I

1:52:43 ↗ think we can keep going so we I think

1:52:51 ↗ the remaining slides are just on in

1:52:53 ↗ terms of next steps in terms of overall

1:52:55 ↗ schedule and future topics so I think in

1:52:58 ↗ terms of kinds of those questions about

1:53:00 ↗ the different options those are really

1:53:02 ↗ the areas where we're seeking some

1:53:03 ↗ feedback councilmember Goodman I'd be

1:53:08 ↗ interested in seeing the next slides

1:53:11 ↗ okay

1:53:16 ↗ okay so on that we actually blew up this

1:53:21 ↗ area of the timeline so the next council

1:53:27 ↗ actions again we're hoping to come back

1:53:29 ↗ on June 4th with the opportunity center

1:53:31 ↗ resolution which would commit to the

1:53:34 ↗ development team that we are interested

1:53:37 ↗ in pursuing X amount of square foot with

1:53:39 ↗ X amount of funding investment and then

1:53:44 ↗ we the next point that the council will

1:53:47 ↗ be able to make a decision is the

1:53:49 ↗ process of the development agreement

1:53:50 ↗ negotiations and approval which we

1:53:52 ↗ anticipate between July and September we

1:53:56 ↗ will also plan to there's again there's

1:53:58 ↗ some steps in here that that the DOE

1:54:01 ↗ development team need to do such as you

1:54:04 ↗ can see they're in june going and

1:54:05 ↗ getting a HUD preliminary loan

1:54:07 ↗ application approval which then allows

1:54:09 ↗ us to proceed with a community meeting

1:54:13 ↗ in July and then also a second one in

1:54:15 ↗ September we're looking at we will look

1:54:19 ↗ at those community beings to get input

1:54:21 ↗ regarding how to activate the public

1:54:23 ↗ spaces looking at the public plaza

1:54:28 ↗ looking at the mid-block crossing and

1:54:30 ↗ the street frontage making sure that

1:54:32 ↗ those are and welcoming and vibrant like

1:54:36 ↗ we all want to see in our central

1:54:37 ↗ Issaquah area and then during the the

1:54:40 ↗ development governance is actually to

1:54:42 ↗ development agreements when regarding

1:54:43 ↗ the project site which is between King

1:54:46 ↗ County's spectrum in the city and then

1:54:48 ↗ one regarding relocation site which is

1:54:50 ↗ between spectrum the city and

1:54:51 ↗ CenturyLink so again those two are

1:54:53 ↗ connected but separate as far as the

1:54:55 ↗ locations so we here in front of Council

1:55:00 ↗ multiple times talking about the drafts

1:55:02 ↗ and negotiations there and that just so

1:55:06 ↗ your reminder that will actually be a

1:55:08 ↗ legally binding contract with explicit

1:55:10 ↗ numbers spelling out roles

1:55:12 ↗ responsibilities investments so again a

1:55:14 ↗ lot of the things we've done to this

1:55:15 ↗ point will be reflected in the

1:55:18 ↗ development agreement and then between

1:55:20 ↗ now and the development time we'll

1:55:22 ↗ continue to refine the numbers that we

1:55:24 ↗ will come back with and have in the

1:55:26 ↗ development agreement details

1:55:29 ↗ any questions about those next steps yes

1:55:33 ↗ come summer Rae I don't know if it's

1:55:35 ↗ next steps driver questions so at some

1:55:38 ↗ point in I don't know if it's the

1:55:39 ↗ development agreement or when when do we

1:55:43 ↗ reach an agreement with spectrum

1:55:46 ↗ spectrum mm-hmm yes okay this is this is

1:55:51 ↗ the cost for the opportunity center for

1:55:55 ↗ the entire project

1:55:56 ↗ whole thing development agreement yeah

1:55:58 ↗ so there will be multiple pieces so and

1:56:00 ↗ in that there you know we will say what

1:56:02 ↗ we commit to and he will the the

1:56:03 ↗ development team will say what they

1:56:05 ↗ commit to so that would be this many

1:56:07 ↗ units this you know again providing all

1:56:09 ↗ the pieces of the puzzle and again it's

1:56:12 ↗ a legally binding document at that point

1:56:14 ↗ and at that point we nailed down exactly

1:56:16 ↗ what the city's contribution to the

1:56:19 ↗ adventure is yes

1:56:21 ↗ in total yes so the June 4th again the

1:56:26 ↗ resolution we need so we need to know

1:56:28 ↗ what our Opportunity Center investment

1:56:31 ↗ appetite is prior to the development

1:56:34 ↗ agreement because there are design that

1:56:36 ↗ needs to move forward we need to have

1:56:38 ↗ those conversations the Century Link and

1:56:41 ↗ etc so I'm sorry and HUD application so

1:56:45 ↗ they the HUD application they're gonna

1:56:47 ↗ show the concept design so those three

1:56:48 ↗ pictures we showed you they're gonna

1:56:49 ↗ show that they're going to discuss what

1:56:51 ↗ how that layout is and you know talk

1:56:53 ↗ about the strengths of the partners etc

1:56:54 ↗ so they can't go there with three or two

1:56:57 ↗ options you know HUD will just say come

1:56:59 ↗ back when you're ready

1:57:01 ↗ and that's actually a new step since

1:57:03 ↗ since they've applied for the RFP so

1:57:06 ↗ again things change in all parts of our

1:57:09 ↗ world here yeah and just so you know

1:57:12 ↗ there's a currently a Tod website we're

1:57:14 ↗ gonna have the Tod as on the active

1:57:16 ↗ projects list so that people can kind of

1:57:18 ↗ follow it that way and on the Tod

1:57:21 ↗ website it talks about the presentations

1:57:23 ↗ you know that we've already made in

1:57:24 ↗ council so people can become more aware

1:57:26 ↗ of that yes there are three potential

1:57:30 ↗ check writing opportunities one is the

1:57:34 ↗ development agreement the first

1:57:36 ↗ development agreement right but there is

1:57:38 ↗ potentially on the second depending on

1:57:40 ↗ how the second goes and then isn't there

1:57:42 ↗ a

1:57:43 ↗ based on depending on tenant

1:57:46 ↗ improvements true so what we hope to do

1:57:50 ↗ is between now well June 4th and the

1:57:53 ↗ development agreement time is to get a

1:57:55 ↗ letter of interest or intent with

1:57:58 ↗ whoever we decide to lease with now

1:58:00 ↗ depending on which option we choose we

1:58:02 ↗ may be able to move faster or slower

1:58:04 ↗ according to that and then we would be

1:58:06 ↗ able to bring forward what that

1:58:08 ↗ additional cost is but again there may

1:58:11 ↗ be some range versus an exact dollar

1:58:15 ↗ amount depending on how far we get with

1:58:17 ↗ those negotiations but the intention is

1:58:19 ↗ to be able to lay that out thank you for

1:58:20 ↗ pointing that out

1:58:21 ↗ and so the two development agreements

1:58:23 ↗ come together through counsel so it

1:58:25 ↗ won't be one and then the other because

1:58:27 ↗ again they are interrelated as far as

1:58:29 ↗ with the land transaction so there's

1:58:32 ↗ just not a need for King County Housing

1:58:34 ↗ Authority to be involved in the Century

1:58:36 ↗ Link site and vice versa

1:58:38 ↗ got it other questions before we move to

1:58:40 ↗ the last slide and so the last slide is

1:58:44 ↗ just when we talk to council members and

1:58:47 ↗ others we just want to make sure that we

1:58:50 ↗ know that again the Tod project has

1:58:52 ↗ multiple topics and we didn't want to

1:58:55 ↗ lose these these are some of the things

1:58:56 ↗ that were mentioned in those briefings

1:58:58 ↗ so we want to make sure that we address

1:59:01 ↗ at a later time and if there's

1:59:02 ↗ additional points that you like us to

1:59:04 ↗ address whether it's through the

1:59:05 ↗ community meeting or in a future

1:59:07 ↗ briefing we want to make sure we do that

1:59:10 ↗ but so this is a list making sure the

1:59:12 ↗ two buildings feel as one I think that's

1:59:15 ↗ one of the the points of the strength of

1:59:17 ↗ Spectrum's proposals that they are going

1:59:20 ↗ to have one property management firm

1:59:21 ↗ they wanted to look the same on the

1:59:23 ↗ outside and how can we how can they are

1:59:25 ↗ really interested in making this a

1:59:26 ↗ community versus one building versus the

1:59:28 ↗ other and then looking at the parking

1:59:31 ↗ needs investment per for double unit

1:59:33 ↗ we'll we'll refine and design and

1:59:36 ↗ mid-block crossing in the plaza so those

1:59:37 ↗ are things that again we'll be talking

1:59:39 ↗ about more later but we really tonight

1:59:41 ↗ need to get back at direction from the

1:59:44 ↗ four of you about your desire for the

1:59:47 ↗ opportunity center thank you either

1:59:52 ↗ material that you want to present before

1:59:53 ↗ we discuss this

1:59:54 ↗ I don't believe so anybody from yep so

2:00:00 ↗ if it's okay with my fellow

2:00:02 ↗ councilmembers I would like to take

2:00:04 ↗ public comment before we discuss this

2:00:06 ↗ I'm getting general agreement so I'm

2:00:08 ↗ gonna offer if anybody in the community

2:00:10 ↗ wishes to speak to this issue I would be

2:00:13 ↗ happy to extend than three minutes is

2:00:17 ↗ Marsh so I'm up here again saying there

2:00:24 ↗ has been absolutely no public vetting of

2:00:28 ↗ this this is a lot of money no one has

2:00:32 ↗ ever asked the community how they want

2:00:34 ↗ the money spent or if they want it spent

2:00:36 ↗ on this every time I ask the question is

2:00:39 ↗ like well it was part of our public

2:00:40 ↗ needs assessment I'm sorry we have

2:00:43 ↗ transportation issues we have lands we

2:00:45 ↗ want to purchase people cannot even stay

2:00:48 ↗ in their own homes yet you cannot be

2:00:51 ↗ bothered to go out to your community to

2:00:53 ↗ ask them if they want to spend money on

2:00:56 ↗ someone else moving in to town and have

2:01:01 ↗ them giving giving them a cheap house oh

2:01:03 ↗ I'm choking up like merry I don't know

2:01:07 ↗ how many times I need to come to the

2:01:10 ↗ microphone and say this is a community

2:01:12 ↗ decision this is not a well you know

2:01:14 ↗ when we come back we're gonna see if the

2:01:17 ↗ public plaza is okay within this thing

2:01:20 ↗ that we've already said yes to you've

2:01:23 ↗ done it before it doesn't come out well

2:01:26 ↗ it pisses the community off sorry

2:01:28 ↗ language and then when you ask us for

2:01:31 ↗ things we won't give it to you because

2:01:34 ↗ you've basically funneled us in a

2:01:35 ↗ direction and never asked if it's our

2:01:37 ↗ town and our money so this is one of

2:01:44 ↗ those things that is making me so grumpy

2:01:47 ↗ that I will activate on it and you don't

2:01:50 ↗ want me to activate on something I

2:01:52 ↗ actually like which is transit oriented

2:01:54 ↗ development do the process right don't

2:01:57 ↗ avoid us and see if the community is

2:02:00 ↗ willing to support what y'all seem to

2:02:03 ↗ want so much one last thing

2:02:06 ↗ staff presentation

2:02:08 ↗ Shen's should be even-handed there

2:02:10 ↗ should be no pom-poms it should just be

2:02:13 ↗ the facts and yet again the pom-poms are

2:02:17 ↗ out and that is it's our town so my

2:02:23 ↗ three minutes are probably up and think

2:02:26 ↗ about us because we pay thank you is

2:02:31 ↗ there anyone else wishes to speak to

2:02:32 ↗ this issue this evening anyone else

2:02:36 ↗ going twice

2:02:38 ↗ going three times all right thanks so so

2:02:45 ↗ and of course the four of us are here

2:02:46 ↗ council is lucky enough to have three

2:02:48 ↗ former chairs of the city's Human

2:02:51 ↗ Services Commission those are the three

2:02:52 ↗ council members who are not here this

2:02:54 ↗ evening but we will soldier on as best

2:02:56 ↗ we can councilmember hunt I'm gonna

2:03:02 ↗ start with a few questions actually if

2:03:04 ↗ that's okay so this the first one is not

2:03:08 ↗ maybe something that you can answer

2:03:09 ↗ today but it's something that I would

2:03:10 ↗ really like to know before I make a

2:03:14 ↗ decision in June and that's about the

2:03:16 ↗ the transit-oriented use of these

2:03:21 ↗ different how the proposed uses mesh

2:03:25 ↗ with transit oriented use so if there is

2:03:30 ↗ any information that could be provided

2:03:31 ↗ about health health point and Valley

2:03:35 ↗ cities in terms of the needs of those

2:03:39 ↗ people to use the transit versus the

2:03:42 ↗ hope link and versus the at work because

2:03:46 ↗ I think that that's important one thing

2:03:48 ↗ that's really important here is that

2:03:50 ↗ we're combining multiple needs of the

2:03:52 ↗ community in terms of we do have a need

2:03:54 ↗ for health but we also have a need for

2:03:56 ↗ transit connections and so potentially

2:03:58 ↗ if we can make the synergy happen there

2:04:02 ↗ I think that's important and I don't

2:04:03 ↗ personally know how that works out so

2:04:06 ↗ that if there's information out there to

2:04:08 ↗ help me with that that would be much

2:04:12 ↗ appreciated if it can't be answered

2:04:13 ↗ today then that's great but if not and I

2:04:18 ↗ meeting we will over question from

2:04:21 ↗ health point in Valley cities about

2:04:23 ↗ their current who they're currently

2:04:24 ↗ serving one of the unknowns is they're

2:04:26 ↗ not currently here in as well so they

2:04:28 ↗ don't know how many people who would

2:04:29 ↗ live in Issaquah would come to Issaquah

2:04:32 ↗ versus you know going to rent in or

2:04:34 ↗ Bellevue or another location but we can

2:04:36 ↗ get some of that date the data about

2:04:38 ↗ their current usage right and I think

2:04:41 ↗ more than more than just how far do they

2:04:44 ↗ come it's more my question is more how

2:04:47 ↗ likely are they going to be to use the

2:04:50 ↗ bus system and then also so for for

2:04:57 ↗ future topics there is a question in

2:04:59 ↗ here for future topics

2:05:01 ↗ there's the integration of separate

2:05:03 ↗ buildings to feel as function as one and

2:05:04 ↗ I I see that there's a configuration

2:05:08 ↗ change of the buildings when depending

2:05:11 ↗ on which option and I think basically

2:05:13 ↗ whatever use goes into this space will

2:05:18 ↗ affect not only how the community that

2:05:21 ↗ comes and uses the space but also will

2:05:23 ↗ affect how the community that lives in

2:05:24 ↗ the other part of the building it will

2:05:27 ↗ affect the functionality of the building

2:05:29 ↗ potentially and the most obvious is I

2:05:31 ↗ think that it changes the footprint of

2:05:33 ↗ the building and so I wondered if you

2:05:38 ↗ could speak at all to how the different

2:05:41 ↗ options might affect the people that are

2:05:44 ↗ living in the building and the function

2:05:47 ↗ of the building for them

2:05:53 ↗ as far as the the residents of the

2:05:56 ↗ building there there isn't a significant

2:06:00 ↗ difference in how one option versus the

2:06:02 ↗ other if you notice the big difference

2:06:03 ↗ between the two really has to do with

2:06:06 ↗ the location of obviously kidney center

2:06:08 ↗ in the daycare and with the daycare

2:06:11 ↗ located in this configuration their

2:06:13 ↗ entire play area is down on the ground

2:06:15 ↗ floor it has to be fenced off by their

2:06:17 ↗ licensed student requirements and in

2:06:20 ↗ this situation only the the smaller kids

2:06:23 ↗ a toddlers have their plague area down

2:06:24 ↗ there and the play area for the rest of

2:06:27 ↗ the kids is up on the or up on the deck

2:06:28 ↗ with the residents above which works for

2:06:31 ↗ the daycare facilities so that's one of

2:06:33 ↗ the major impacts to the tenets of the

2:06:35 ↗ building that for the daycare they

2:06:36 ↗ prefer it down on ground but they've

2:06:38 ↗ done it the other way as well

2:06:40 ↗ the kidney center you know they they I

2:06:43 ↗ think like the other location better

2:06:45 ↗ because they have the visibility from

2:06:46 ↗ April Street we just felt it was better

2:06:48 ↗ for the communal center if they're going

2:06:50 ↗ to be part of the project to have that

2:06:51 ↗ visibility and the kidney center does

2:06:53 ↗ benefit from the Moores you can't stop

2:06:57 ↗ and drop somebody off on Maple Street

2:06:59 ↗ it's a really busy street with no

2:07:00 ↗ load/unload

2:07:01 ↗ in our new street you'll be able to do

2:07:03 ↗ that and the kidney center patients come

2:07:05 ↗ by uber and buy other vehicles where

2:07:06 ↗ they need a little more time to get out

2:07:08 ↗ of their car so this kind of works for

2:07:10 ↗ them in this configuration but for the

2:07:12 ↗ residents themselves we're achieving

2:07:14 ↗ that kind of integrated community by as

2:07:16 ↗ I've said before having that shared

2:07:18 ↗ common space we're going to one fitness

2:07:20 ↗ room one front door one package room

2:07:22 ↗ where the residents will go to that

2:07:24 ↗ regardless of which building they're in

2:07:25 ↗ one community room kind of kitchen area

2:07:28 ↗ where they go so that we really try to

2:07:29 ↗ get that integration amongst the

2:07:31 ↗ residents and that's really not affected

2:07:34 ↗ by you know where how big the

2:07:37 ↗ opportunity center he is or where it's

2:07:38 ↗ located that that happens either way and

2:07:41 ↗ then lastly related to transit but the

2:07:44 ↗ parking differences for the different

2:07:46 ↗ options and how that would be addressed

2:07:50 ↗ so our code currently requires two

2:07:54 ↗ spaces per 1,000 square feet so

2:07:56 ↗ depending on the size would depend on

2:07:57 ↗ how many spaces were allocated for the

2:08:01 ↗ so that's what the code requires versus

2:08:04 ↗ what the use

2:08:05 ↗ choirs or believes they will require so

2:08:09 ↗ we have some discussions with health

2:08:11 ↗ point and Valley cities about their need

2:08:14 ↗ for between 40 and 60 spaces total so

2:08:17 ↗ some of those employees and some of

2:08:18 ↗ those are for you know patients and so

2:08:21 ↗ we have started conversations and

2:08:23 ↗ looking at a couple different options

2:08:26 ↗ looking at on-street parking potentially

2:08:28 ↗ looking at the metro overflow Park Park

2:08:34 ↗ & Ride lot across the street so by the

2:08:36 ↗ next to the skate park it's a shared use

2:08:38 ↗ of the park

2:08:39 ↗ the Tibbets Valley Park right now

2:08:41 ↗ looking to see if there's some some

2:08:43 ↗ opportunities to have a few spaces there

2:08:44 ↗ allocated so we know we're not gonna be

2:08:46 ↗ able to find you know another 20 or so

2:08:49 ↗ spaces in one location but we know that

2:08:51 ↗ we can find some other spots so that's

2:08:54 ↗ something that the staff will be working

2:08:55 ↗ on again if we move forward with that

2:08:58 ↗ the other thing is we don't know is how

2:09:00 ↗ how again how what the use of transit

2:09:04 ↗ exactly will be for their their

2:09:05 ↗ employees so this may reduce the need

2:09:08 ↗ for parking where other locations

2:09:10 ↗ there's not next our transit center

2:09:12 ↗ right we also don't know over time if

2:09:14 ↗ they're how parking usage and transit

2:09:17 ↗ usage will require this or allow this to

2:09:20 ↗ need less parking spaces so that's the

2:09:22 ↗ hope obviously be next to a Transit

2:09:24 ↗ Center anybody else well while you're

2:09:31 ↗ thinking so I I love hopefully truth be

2:09:38 ↗ told our my company has a long-standing

2:09:41 ↗ relationship with hoping I actually do

2:09:44 ↗ I'm a crier for our auction every year

2:09:46 ↗ that we do to benefit hope link and I

2:09:49 ↗ have actually sung Sinatra as a

2:09:51 ↗ fundraiser I sang the way you look

2:09:54 ↗ tonight and it's when I was I was

2:09:57 ↗ running for that other office we tried

2:09:58 ↗ to scrub it off the internet

2:09:59 ↗ she probably find it you probably find

2:10:01 ↗ it someplace on the internet but having

2:10:04 ↗ said that this community has talked

2:10:08 ↗ about a human services campus for very

2:10:12 ↗ long time and one of the reasons why we

2:10:13 ↗ don't have one today is because it was

2:10:16 ↗ seen that health and dental was an

2:10:17 ↗ absolute corners

2:10:18 ↗ to what we would want to do and of the

2:10:21 ↗ original plans that came through none of

2:10:24 ↗ them were able at the time to bring

2:10:26 ↗ forward a health and dental program and

2:10:29 ↗ it was just seen as absolutely essential

2:10:30 ↗ so I think this is a huge public benefit

2:10:37 ↗ for our community if it would be if we

2:10:40 ↗ were able to bring it in and so speaking

2:10:42 ↗ as one of seven one of four today but

2:10:46 ↗ what a seven I I would be interested in

2:10:48 ↗ seeing the option to going forward when

2:10:52 ↗ we reconvene in June

2:10:56 ↗ that's what member Goodman thank you

2:10:59 ↗ well I I think this is potentially just

2:11:04 ↗ a fantastic project and it's very very

2:11:08 ↗ exciting it's been very very exciting

2:11:10 ↗ all along we are this summer as I recall

2:11:15 ↗ coming upon two years that there have

2:11:20 ↗ been conversations about this at the

2:11:24 ↗ administration level staff level and at

2:11:27 ↗ the council level and so I know that

2:11:33 ↗ there's been a lot of planning that's

2:11:35 ↗ going on a lot of work and I know

2:11:37 ↗ there's a lot of excitement around it

2:11:39 ↗ and I'm just as excited as everybody

2:11:41 ↗ else however I I agree with and bothered

2:11:46 ↗ by the amount of time that's gone by

2:11:48 ↗ when we haven't been out in the

2:11:50 ↗ community and the last understanding was

2:11:55 ↗ that we would go out to the community

2:11:56 ↗ starting in January and the notion that

2:12:01 ↗ we would make a significant decision and

2:12:05 ↗ then not go out to the community until

2:12:07 ↗ July and then have the engagement be

2:12:11 ↗ around how to activate public spaces

2:12:13 ↗ doesn't feel right to me

2:12:14 ↗ so at this point in time I would be

2:12:19 ↗ leaning towards no additional cost

2:12:21 ↗ because I really think we got to be

2:12:22 ↗ before their community first before we

2:12:24 ↗ make that kind of a decision thank you

2:12:28 ↗ comes from ever right

2:12:30 ↗ so I'm gonna generally align with

2:12:33 ↗ Councilman councilmember Goodman it's a

2:12:39 ↗ lot of money there's a lot of moving

2:12:42 ↗ parts I don't think that that we really

2:12:45 ↗ understand what it is there seems to be

2:12:48 ↗ a lot of risk to me associated with it

2:12:51 ↗ and and I've I wish I could articulate

2:12:55 ↗ exactly why I'm uncomfortable and I will

2:12:58 ↗ work through that between now and the

2:13:00 ↗ end of this week and share that with you

2:13:02 ↗ but my intuition is telling me that

2:13:05 ↗ there's something here that doesn't feel

2:13:07 ↗ right with me

2:13:07 ↗ and so I'm a little bit apprehensive and

2:13:10 ↗ I will I will get my thoughts together

2:13:12 ↗ on that and share them with you between

2:13:13 ↗ now and the end of the week ask a

2:13:16 ↗ question about your the risk you

2:13:17 ↗ perceive for the for this so I can

2:13:19 ↗ understand that a ton of uncertainty and

2:13:21 ↗ you know self-admittedly between about

2:13:23 ↗ what it's going to look like you know

2:13:25 ↗ we're gonna get there what's it going to

2:13:27 ↗ cost what are the operating costs going

2:13:29 ↗ to be long term there's still a lot of

2:13:31 ↗ questions that I hear in the

2:13:33 ↗ presentation

2:13:37 ↗ yeah this comes member hunt so I I think

2:13:42 ↗ like councilmember Goodman I think this

2:13:45 ↗ is a very exciting and very important

2:13:49 ↗ project I think it will be one of a

2:13:54 ↗ example for the region and my my biggest

2:14:01 ↗ question remains how these different

2:14:04 ↗ uses will meld with the transit-oriented

2:14:07 ↗ nature of this development because I

2:14:09 ↗ think this this is an effort to get away

2:14:13 ↗ from using automobiles to get around

2:14:16 ↗ everywhere and I think potentially we

2:14:19 ↗ could align the use of the commercial

2:14:23 ↗ space and the nonprofit with the with

2:14:25 ↗ transit and that should be I think

2:14:29 ↗ really good for the community and I I

2:14:31 ↗ would think it would also be good for

2:14:33 ↗ the people that live in that building to

2:14:34 ↗ have a use that aligns with the transit

2:14:36 ↗ and so for that reason I

2:14:40 ↗ I'm not sure that I really understands

2:14:43 ↗ the difference between the different

2:14:45 ↗ uses in terms of that transit use and we

2:14:47 ↗ would would want to know more about that

2:14:48 ↗ I think that we have we have heard from

2:14:52 ↗ the Office of Sustainability that both

2:14:54 ↗ dental health and medical health and as

2:14:58 ↗ well as employment services and other

2:15:01 ↗ nonprofit services these are all needs

2:15:03 ↗ in the community and so I think there's

2:15:07 ↗ I think that there are multiple options

2:15:10 ↗ that make sense and then I'm interested

2:15:13 ↗ to hear how those options align with the

2:15:15 ↗ transit any other comments before we

2:15:21 ↗ close this does staff request any other

2:15:25 ↗ information from us oh all right

2:15:28 ↗ with that we will move on to ID zero 273

2:15:32 ↗ status update on city parcel with

2:15:35 ↗ Issaquah school district interest this

2:15:37 ↗ will be Keith Niven before us and I see

2:15:41 ↗ some of our school district friends are

2:15:43 ↗ with us as well

2:15:56 ↗ Thank You councilmember marts

2:15:59 ↗ good evening City Council keep living

2:16:09 ↗ and so last time we talked about this

2:16:19 ↗ was at a joint city council school board

2:16:23 ↗ meeting and we talked about the process

2:16:27 ↗ that we were going to go through to talk

2:16:29 ↗ about this piece of property and

2:16:31 ↗ potential surplus of this piece of

2:16:35 ↗ property and so where we are right now

2:16:39 ↗ is we're at the second council work

2:16:41 ↗ session on May 14th and this evening

2:16:45 ↗ we're gonna update you on where we are

2:16:49 ↗ on the issues that have been identified

2:16:51 ↗ so following this meeting that we had in

2:16:54 ↗ April we asked the City Council to

2:16:57 ↗ identify the topics and the issues that

2:17:00 ↗ they would like some further information

2:17:02 ↗ on and so what came out of that was

2:17:06 ↗ critical areas and geology traffic

2:17:11 ↗ issues we talked about trees and views

2:17:14 ↗ and so those were really the topical

2:17:16 ↗ issues that the council felt like they

2:17:19 ↗ wanted the school district and staff to

2:17:22 ↗ provide some more information on to help

2:17:24 ↗ inform whether or not the City Council

2:17:26 ↗ would be willing to potentially sell

2:17:28 ↗ this piece of property for a potential

2:17:30 ↗ I'm an elementary school so and going

2:17:34 ↗ back to the process slide that was the

2:17:36 ↗ previous one to this one we discussed

2:17:39 ↗ that this topic would both go to land

2:17:41 ↗ and Shore in June and to the services

2:17:44 ↗ committee in June and we talked about

2:17:46 ↗ whether or not we even needed this

2:17:48 ↗ second work session and council member

2:17:50 ↗ Ramos who didn't sit on either those two

2:17:52 ↗ committees said yes we should have this

2:17:54 ↗ discussion this evening so this is for

2:17:57 ↗ bill

2:17:59 ↗ so what I would like to start with and I

2:18:03 ↗ apologize for not getting this to you in

2:18:05 ↗ advance is the first thing that we've

2:18:09 ↗ accomplished since the last time we

2:18:11 ↗ talked about this is we identified 40

2:18:24 ↗ percent slopes are and so I have so what

2:18:34 ↗ this shows not very well on the slide I

2:18:37 ↗ apologize for that but where you can see

2:18:40 ↗ on your map is where the 40% slopes

2:18:44 ↗ start along the property both to the

2:18:47 ↗ north and to the west and that will that

2:18:56 ↗ those are the entireties so we had this

2:18:58 ↗ surveyed so those topographic lines were

2:19:00 ↗ actually surveyed by a surveyor so those

2:19:03 ↗ are accurate and so internal to the

2:19:07 ↗ property and this was one of the

2:19:08 ↗ questions that councilmember hunt asked

2:19:11 ↗ I believe last time was were there steep

2:19:14 ↗ slopes internal to the property and the

2:19:16 ↗ answer based on this topographic survey

2:19:19 ↗ is there or not so the second piece and

2:19:23 ↗ I'm going to invite Steve Crawford from

2:19:24 ↗ the school district to come up and share

2:19:26 ↗ what the school district has put

2:19:28 ↗ together the second piece is geo

2:19:31 ↗ technical information about the property

2:19:34 ↗ and the school district has done some

2:19:38 ↗ borings on the property since we had our

2:19:41 ↗ last meeting and I think even though

2:19:43 ↗ there's not written information to share

2:19:45 ↗ I think that mr. Crawford can talk about

2:19:47 ↗ what they know in terms of geology come

2:19:52 ↗ on up Steve not doing this by myself

2:19:57 ↗ Crawford welcome

2:19:59 ↗ Steve Crawford equesticle district

2:20:02 ↗ director of capital projects so initial

2:20:05 ↗ soils geotech investigation work was

2:20:07 ↗ done with basically on the top of the

2:20:09 ↗ hill huh I'm sorry could if you gather

2:20:12 ↗ Thanks sorry with backhoe trenches those

2:20:16 ↗ went to a depth of about 10 to 12 feet

2:20:19 ↗ and indicated the type of soil that you

2:20:22 ↗ typically find in glacial marine areas

2:20:24 ↗ there was some concern on the part of

2:20:27 ↗ the geotech engineer in there and

2:20:29 ↗ evaluation of the steep sloped areas and

2:20:32 ↗ that there was some presence of some

2:20:34 ↗ landslide areas to the northwest there

2:20:37 ↗ was an outcropping of a denser material

2:20:41 ↗ down towards the toe of the slope that

2:20:44 ↗ to them raised some questions about

2:20:45 ↗ slope stability the upper part that you

2:20:52 ↗ could ascertain the soil composition

2:20:54 ↗ from the backhoe testing was moderate to

2:20:57 ↗ loosely compacted material and the

2:21:00 ↗ presence of the denser material towards

2:21:02 ↗ the toe of the slope indicated a concern

2:21:05 ↗ to them that there was instability and a

2:21:08 ↗ severe seismic event and so they

2:21:12 ↗ requested that we drill some deeper

2:21:15 ↗ holes so that they can get a much better

2:21:17 ↗ picture of what underlies the upper

2:21:19 ↗ materials so that work was completed

2:21:22 ↗ last Friday so I don't have a

2:21:24 ↗ geotechnical report at this time but the

2:21:27 ↗ verbal report was that all three of

2:21:31 ↗ those borings indicated that the the

2:21:35 ↗ less dense material stopped at a depth

2:21:37 ↗ of about 30 feet and then it was solid

2:21:41 ↗ hard dense material below that and as I

2:21:45 ↗ said it's a leave their concerns with

2:21:48 ↗ regards to slope stability so there is a

2:21:51 ↗ softer material at the top to deal with

2:21:53 ↗ but overall the site should stay just

2:21:57 ↗ fine thank you very much you come to

2:22:01 ↗ remember good good question

2:22:03 ↗ so Steve you don't there's not a report

2:22:07 ↗ written report yet not yet but as soon

2:22:11 ↗ as we have it will forward it to you

2:22:13 ↗ they just finished the drilling Friday

2:22:14 ↗ thank you and what we had agreed to was

2:22:18 ↗ that we would have Golder and a Mac who

2:22:22 ↗ are the city's consultants review that

2:22:23 ↗ report when it comes in so the the

2:22:26 ↗ council when we asked for preferences on

2:22:29 ↗ level of kind of due diligence that we

2:22:34 ↗ would do a double peer review on that

2:22:36 ↗ information when it comes in so that

2:22:38 ↗ will be part of this next piece and as

2:22:40 ↗ soon as it comes in we'll have we'll

2:22:42 ↗ send that off to Golder and AMEC to do a

2:22:44 ↗ double peer review so the next piece

2:22:48 ↗ after after geology was trees so we've

2:22:53 ↗ executed a contract with tree solutions

2:22:56 ↗ incorporated to go out and do a complete

2:22:59 ↗ tree survey of the property as well as

2:23:03 ↗ to look at what the impact would

2:23:05 ↗ potentially be for downslope trees if

2:23:08 ↗ trees were removed off the off the

2:23:10 ↗ potential top of the hill that work

2:23:14 ↗ unfortunately treat arborists are really

2:23:17 ↗ busy right now so the best I could do

2:23:20 ↗ was get them to go out in June so I

2:23:23 ↗ doubt they'll be ready for land and

2:23:26 ↗ Shore in June maybe services in June but

2:23:29 ↗ we'll get that information to the

2:23:30 ↗ council as soon as that becomes

2:23:32 ↗ available and the school district did

2:23:34 ↗ have an arborist go up and look at trees

2:23:38 ↗ and I think Steve has some information

2:23:41 ↗ about what they found to share this

2:23:43 ↗ evening so the arborists review of the

2:23:51 ↗ tree and forest area is that the dead

2:23:55 ↗ and obviously affected trees are

2:23:57 ↗ impacted with laminated root rot it's a

2:24:01 ↗ disease that impacts fir trees and the

2:24:04 ↗ spores are typically present in glacial

2:24:06 ↗ moraine soils the trees when stressed

2:24:10 ↗ are not able to resist that and get

2:24:13 ↗ infected

2:24:14 ↗ it basically softens up the roots the

2:24:17 ↗ roots can't take the moisture the trees

2:24:20 ↗ exhibit the impact by dying from the top

2:24:23 ↗ down there's an area of about 17 trees

2:24:27 ↗ towards the north west corner the parcel

2:24:31 ↗ there's another smaller stand about

2:24:34 ↗ two-thirds of the way down the south

2:24:37 ↗ towards the South off of the west edge

2:24:40 ↗ of the property in the center area of a

2:24:44 ↗ depression there's a number of trees

2:24:46 ↗ that are impacted and he also noted that

2:24:50 ↗ there's obvious root rot impact to trees

2:24:54 ↗ off of Highlands drive and around to the

2:24:58 ↗ south

2:24:58 ↗ above i-90 as well so it's something

2:25:01 ↗ that's become fairly prevalent in the

2:25:03 ↗ area when we did the clearing for Pine

2:25:06 ↗ Lake middle school there were no trees

2:25:09 ↗ that had any visible signs of impact but

2:25:14 ↗ an assessment of the roots after we

2:25:16 ↗ pushed them over for the clearing for

2:25:18 ↗ the building about a third of them were

2:25:20 ↗ impacted with root rot so there are a

2:25:28 ↗ couple of different ways you can deal

2:25:30 ↗ with it if you want to stop the spread

2:25:31 ↗ of the root rot below ground and it

2:25:34 ↗ spreads whenever an infected tree root

2:25:36 ↗ touches a healthy tree root you clear

2:25:41 ↗ and remove the stumps for a distance of

2:25:44 ↗ 50 feet from the outermost apparently

2:25:49 ↗ impacted tree so that creates a

2:25:54 ↗ basically dead area that the root rot

2:25:59 ↗ won't spread to trees further out as he

2:26:03 ↗ noted that there are pockets of the root

2:26:08 ↗ rot that will probably continue to

2:26:09 ↗ develop over the hillside and there is

2:26:13 ↗ no way to predict where or when that may

2:26:16 ↗ occur it generally takes one to two

2:26:18 ↗ years for the impact to start to show at

2:26:21 ↗ the top of the tree so

2:26:24 ↗ you don't know looking at a stand of

2:26:26 ↗ trees whether they're impacted or not

2:26:31 ↗ you know today they could be but it

2:26:35 ↗ wouldn't show for maybe a year maybe two

2:26:37 ↗ years but the likelihood is that it will

2:26:40 ↗ continue to spread on the hillside so

2:26:48 ↗ that raises some interesting questions

2:26:50 ↗ about how you go about dealing with it

2:26:52 ↗ do you clear trees and replant with red

2:26:56 ↗ alders or Cedars that are not

2:26:59 ↗ susceptible do you leave the dead trees

2:27:02 ↗ in place in part you're dealing with or

2:27:05 ↗ in most parts you're dealing with a tree

2:27:08 ↗ dairy that's on a steep slope so you

2:27:11 ↗ have to deal with the potential impacts

2:27:13 ↗ of removing trees on a dead slope and or

2:27:16 ↗ just lettin them die and stand which

2:27:19 ↗ probably accelerates the spread and

2:27:22 ↗ replant as you see dead areas appear so

2:27:25 ↗ that has an impact on view I think the

2:27:31 ↗ reality is that any type of a solution

2:27:34 ↗ when if the district were to move

2:27:36 ↗ forward on the property would require a

2:27:38 ↗ solution that involved the city because

2:27:41 ↗ the area of development is limited to a

2:27:47 ↗ relatively small area it's above in east

2:27:51 ↗ of the steep sloped area except in a

2:27:54 ↗ couple little areas one at the extreme

2:27:57 ↗ far north and a little tiny area towards

2:27:59 ↗ the south but the majority of the steep

2:28:02 ↗ sloped area and trees would still be on

2:28:04 ↗ city property and so you can't

2:28:08 ↗ realistically develop a solution for one

2:28:12 ↗ area without developing a solution for

2:28:15 ↗ the rest of the slope so so the good

2:28:21 ↗ news on this topic is because it is

2:28:23 ↗ complicated we're getting a second

2:28:25 ↗ opinion because our arbors will go out

2:28:27 ↗ and look at the same trees in the same

2:28:30 ↗ area so you know the good news is we'll

2:28:33 ↗ have at least two professional opinions

2:28:34 ↗ on that if there's

2:28:37 ↗ seems like there's two potential impacts

2:28:38 ↗ associated with this right one is on

2:28:40 ↗ views and the other is potentially on

2:28:44 ↗ hill stability and how do we get our

2:28:48 ↗ arms around so the solutions that would

2:28:52 ↗ address both potential impacts great

2:28:58 ↗ question I think when we have a better

2:29:02 ↗ understanding of the extent of the

2:29:05 ↗ potential diseased area I mean at some

2:29:08 ↗ point those trees are gonna come out

2:29:10 ↗ though they'll die and at some point

2:29:14 ↗ they'll not be providing the service

2:29:17 ↗ they are now to deflecting moisture off

2:29:20 ↗ the hillside part of I think what we

2:29:24 ↗ need to have a conversation about with

2:29:28 ↗ our geo Tech's is the issue of water

2:29:31 ↗ once we once we have this soils report

2:29:35 ↗ one of the conversations I'm going to

2:29:37 ↗ have with our geo Texas talk to me about

2:29:40 ↗ I'm what I heard from Steve my

2:29:42 ↗ translation of what I heard from Steve

2:29:44 ↗ was it's highly permeable soil so

2:29:47 ↗ loosely compacted it's gonna flow water

2:29:50 ↗ in really well and so the question is

2:29:53 ↗ you know if that's a similar soil on the

2:29:57 ↗ hillside you know what happens if the

2:29:59 ↗ tree canopy goes away so those are all

2:30:01 ↗ questions I think we're gonna have to

2:30:02 ↗ understand better to deal with at least

2:30:05 ↗ the loss of trees that's going to happen

2:30:08 ↗ inevitably whether this property gets

2:30:10 ↗ developed or not as it relates to views

2:30:13 ↗ when we get to that we can get to there

2:30:15 ↗ now is what we talked about with the

2:30:17 ↗ school district was to do kind of a 3d

2:30:21 ↗ imaging of this property and we're gonna

2:30:23 ↗ have to make some assumptions about how

2:30:25 ↗ many trees are coming down when we do

2:30:28 ↗ that so that the views are as realistic

2:30:30 ↗ as we can make them when that imagery

2:30:33 ↗ comes forward for the council's

2:30:34 ↗ consideration and I know that Steve and

2:30:38 ↗ talking with Steve one of the things

2:30:40 ↗ they wanted to understand was are they

2:30:42 ↗ going to get a resolution from their

2:30:43 ↗ board to move forward with this property

2:30:47 ↗ because that makes a big difference on

2:30:48 ↗ how much they spend

2:30:50 ↗ on putting together some of these things

2:30:53 ↗ that we're asking for right now and the

2:30:55 ↗ soil issue was one of the first hurdles

2:30:57 ↗ to get over I think so the last issue

2:31:01 ↗ that we haven't talked about yet and we

2:31:03 ↗ can go back and talk about all these

2:31:04 ↗ more if you'd like is traffic and there

2:31:08 ↗ were kind of a couple pieces that I

2:31:09 ↗ think the council asked for one was to

2:31:13 ↗ understand the traffic needs for

2:31:17 ↗ Discovery Drive I think you've heard

2:31:19 ↗ from some residents in West Highlands

2:31:20 ↗ Park that have expressed concern over

2:31:23 ↗ school buses and ambulances being on the

2:31:25 ↗ same roadway so I think we need to talk

2:31:27 ↗ about that a little bit and the other

2:31:28 ↗ thing was there was a request that there

2:31:32 ↗ would be some traffic counts done at

2:31:35 ↗ particularly Grand Ridge Elementary was

2:31:37 ↗ identified as one of the schools that

2:31:39 ↗ would be interesting to see what the

2:31:42 ↗ traffic generation rates are for one of

2:31:45 ↗ the school districts elementary schools

2:31:47 ↗ as opposed to just using the numbers out

2:31:49 ↗ of ite manual and so I think Steve can

2:31:53 ↗ address where they are right now with

2:31:55 ↗ traffic information

2:32:02 ↗ so look in that discovery drive the

2:32:05 ↗ traffic engineers assessment was that

2:32:07 ↗ discovery is that had West from ninth is

2:32:10 ↗ two lanes until the first signal light

2:32:13 ↗ where you turn left at eight to head to

2:32:17 ↗ the eastern entrance to the hospital and

2:32:18 ↗ the other Medical Center building beyond

2:32:22 ↗ eight it narrows to one lane until it

2:32:25 ↗ gets well it narrows to one lane his

2:32:28 ↗ recommendation would be that regardless

2:32:30 ↗ of whether there's any development on

2:32:32 ↗ this parcel that the roadway ought to be

2:32:33 ↗ two lanes to 7th Avenue at least which

2:32:36 ↗ is the road that leads south to the

2:32:39 ↗ emergency entrance to the hospital that

2:32:42 ↗ with one lane you have a potential for a

2:32:44 ↗ blockage and/or a delay in an emergency

2:32:47 ↗ vehicle if you have two lanes there's a

2:32:49 ↗ lane for traffic to pull over and allow

2:32:52 ↗ the emergency vehicle to pass beyond

2:32:56 ↗ that then it basically serves the

2:32:59 ↗ residential area that exists on the west

2:33:02 ↗ end of this Highlands area and

2:33:04 ↗ potentially school site along with the

2:33:06 ↗ one residential area that's under

2:33:08 ↗ construction immediately west of the

2:33:10 ↗ hospital so that kind of deals with

2:33:15 ↗ discovery as far as the school site

2:33:19 ↗ itself we did do traffic counting at

2:33:23 ↗ Clark and Grand Ridge to get the number

2:33:27 ↗ of vehicles in the AM and PM Peaks for

2:33:31 ↗ queuing that's a very poignant so we

2:33:39 ↗ have those numbers and the numbers of

2:33:42 ↗ vehicles the length of the queues and

2:33:45 ↗ the worst case situations in the worst

2:33:48 ↗ case at Grand Ridge you would be looking

2:33:52 ↗ at a distance of about 700 feet the

2:33:55 ↗ proposed design provides about sixteen

2:33:58 ↗ hundred and fifty feet of queue space on

2:34:00 ↗ the site off of city streets so I think

2:34:05 ↗ that realistically the pickup drop-off

2:34:08 ↗ traffic would be accommodated Grand

2:34:12 ↗ range is a little interesting and that

2:34:14 ↗ there's a hundred and twenty kids that

2:34:15 ↗ it

2:34:16 ↗ and the basic are the before and after

2:34:17 ↗ school care program so there's about 120

2:34:22 ↗ kids that generally are dropped off

2:34:24 ↗ before school and are not part of the

2:34:28 ↗ general population that arrives shortly

2:34:30 ↗ before the bell the typical peak for

2:34:34 ↗ school traffic in terms of queuing and

2:34:37 ↗ potential backup is in the afternoon

2:34:39 ↗ when the parents arrive sometimes a half

2:34:43 ↗ hour before school gets out to queue up

2:34:45 ↗ at the space closest to the front door

2:34:48 ↗ or at the end of the line and wait for

2:34:51 ↗ school to end the mornings generally not

2:34:53 ↗ much of an issue because they generally

2:34:55 ↗ arrive in sort of a onesie twosie

2:34:57 ↗ fashion dropping it off in two-part

2:35:05 ↗ question that I have on this is I

2:35:07 ↗ appreciate this verbal report we'll get

2:35:10 ↗ some kind of document to go along with

2:35:12 ↗ this yeah Keith is nodding his head yes

2:35:15 ↗ okay other questions okay thank you

2:35:24 ↗ questions in general for Keith or anyone

2:35:28 ↗ else no good for now so I'll just to

2:35:37 ↗ clarify again a little bit on this

2:35:38 ↗ question about trees and slopes so it

2:35:44 ↗ seems to me that you'd have one kind of

2:35:46 ↗ plan if you were warehouser and you had

2:35:50 ↗ a forest full of Doug firs and you

2:35:52 ↗ wanted to reduce you know minimize the

2:35:55 ↗ impact to the rest of your Doug first

2:35:57 ↗ and then you have a potential different

2:35:58 ↗ answer if you want to maintain canopy at

2:36:02 ↗ its fullest while dealing with something

2:36:05 ↗ and you might have yet a third answer

2:36:08 ↗ that is if you want to maintain slope

2:36:12 ↗ strength as much as possible while

2:36:14 ↗ dealing with an infestation of this root

2:36:18 ↗ rot so you know it's going to be

2:36:21 ↗ important to understand that the facets

2:36:23 ↗ of that that have to do with maximizing

2:36:26 ↗ slope stability and the facets that have

2:36:28 ↗ to do

2:36:29 ↗ with addressing canopy and the extent to

2:36:32 ↗ which they're complementary and the

2:36:34 ↗ extent to which they're not

2:36:36 ↗ complementary that reasonable question

2:36:40 ↗ in my part absolutely you know I think

2:36:43 ↗ that what ends up happening on the slope

2:36:46 ↗ and the trees there will be a way to

2:36:48 ↗ program it for an outcome that we want

2:36:51 ↗ to optimize so in other words you know

2:36:54 ↗ it may very well be that we decide that

2:36:57 ↗ the first thing we want is to establish

2:37:01 ↗ a new tree species on that hillside that

2:37:04 ↗ will grow so that in ten years you know

2:37:07 ↗ whatever building gets built there is

2:37:09 ↗ completely shielded by a new tree stand

2:37:10 ↗ that is not affected by the existing

2:37:13 ↗ disease it could be that we decide that

2:37:16 ↗ we wait for the existing trees to die

2:37:18 ↗ and then we plant and then there's that

2:37:21 ↗ impact is you know 10 15 years from now

2:37:25 ↗ so yeah we'll be able to I think wait

2:37:28 ↗ our priorities if we decide to go down

2:37:31 ↗ that road with the school district at

2:37:32 ↗ some point I realize there's a real art

2:37:34 ↗ to it in my house in Minnesota we had

2:37:36 ↗ hybrid poplars which I think only lasts

2:37:39 ↗ about 30 years but in 10 years they're

2:37:42 ↗ like a hundred and twenty feet tall yeah

2:37:43 ↗ I mean they just they grow like bad

2:37:45 ↗ weeds yeah yeah so anyhow I'll be

2:37:48 ↗ interested to see that cottonwoods yeah

2:37:50 ↗ they're questions from other council

2:37:53 ↗ members we've done Oh

2:37:55 ↗ councilmember hunt um I think I maybe I

2:37:59 ↗ just didn't hear so the the geotech work

2:38:01 ↗ though is completed and so the borings

2:38:05 ↗ are done their consultant AES I will be

2:38:09 ↗ writing up a report

2:38:10 ↗ so they'll they'll write down their

2:38:12 ↗ findings identify what soils they found

2:38:15 ↗ in their cores and then we'll be able to

2:38:18 ↗ allow our consultants to review that and

2:38:21 ↗ they'll be able to discuss whether they

2:38:23 ↗ agree on that site stability conclusion

2:38:28 ↗ that Steve alluded to earlier that your

2:38:33 ↗ question was this was okay so was the

2:38:36 ↗ state site stability conclusion was that

2:38:38 ↗ the conclusion of that kind

2:38:40 ↗ company that you just mentioned so

2:38:42 ↗ Steve's understanding of that he does

2:38:45 ↗ not have the report yet is that the

2:38:47 ↗ conclusions are that the geology is

2:38:50 ↗ stable all right any other questions

2:38:55 ↗ with that I will ask if any members of

2:38:57 ↗ the public wish to speak to this issue

2:38:58 ↗ this evening

2:39:12 ↗ I guess my first question to the owners

2:39:14 ↗ of these homes know what they're dealing

2:39:17 ↗ with kids the latest version of the plan

2:39:21 ↗ that I've seen anyway is the roads

2:39:23 ↗ circling the site so there'd be a road

2:39:25 ↗ earlier versions showed a nice strip of

2:39:28 ↗ trees which we're not going to survive

2:39:30 ↗ anyway so now there's a road right at

2:39:33 ↗ the western boundary of or the eastern

2:39:35 ↗ boundary of the school potential school

2:39:38 ↗ site I think in terms of trees and all

2:39:42 ↗ we're looking at I don't I see an

2:39:47 ↗ arborist is you know but we're really

2:39:50 ↗ looking at a forester and and it's

2:39:52 ↗ somebody that's gonna be looking at this

2:39:54 ↗ hillside for the long term in terms of

2:39:56 ↗ what trees what trees need to come down

2:39:59 ↗ which trees need to go in and

2:40:00 ↗ replacement and it's not it's not easy

2:40:04 ↗ those soils do drain they don't hold

2:40:07 ↗ much water so you've got to deal with

2:40:11 ↗ that and we've been messing around with

2:40:13 ↗ the hydrology in that area for decades

2:40:15 ↗ now you know Camp Creek was flowing

2:40:18 ↗ before yeah before they did anything

2:40:21 ↗ when that was 40 acres up or the

2:40:23 ↗ hospital was DNR forests there and Camp

2:40:26 ↗ Creek was flowing and there was there

2:40:29 ↗ was evidence there of old piping and all

2:40:30 ↗ the rest at Camp Creek that's all of

2:40:32 ↗ course gone when it blew out but so

2:40:34 ↗ there's definitely Springs and all of

2:40:36 ↗ that that's going on the hillside we

2:40:39 ↗ also know that Reid the guy that had the

2:40:43 ↗ that over excavated the gravel pit where

2:40:46 ↗ Home Depot is and went down into the

2:40:48 ↗ water table there and that was quite a

2:40:51 ↗ violation achieve was just quite easily

2:40:53 ↗ got away with he was going to excavate

2:40:58 ↗ the land just north of this of this

2:41:00 ↗ property and turned out that the soils

2:41:04 ↗ there was gonna be gravel and he did

2:41:06 ↗ find out going down fairly quickly that

2:41:09 ↗ they gravel disappeared and they got

2:41:11 ↗ into other material and he abandoned the

2:41:13 ↗ effort to do that so it's not

2:41:15 ↗ unsurprising that this property maybe

2:41:17 ↗ has a different different surface than

2:41:20 ↗ it does down below

2:41:25 ↗ King County is dealing a lot with forest

2:41:28 ↗ lands that have root rot that they are

2:41:31 ↗ replanting because they're going to

2:41:33 ↗ continue them to be in forest lands it's

2:41:36 ↗ a common problem so there's people out

2:41:38 ↗ there that are dealing with root rot

2:41:41 ↗ issues in the long term one of the

2:41:43 ↗ problems with root rot in this area is

2:41:45 ↗ we're going to be having these

2:41:47 ↗ potentially trees with compromised roots

2:41:50 ↗ very close to buildings in schoolyard in

2:41:54 ↗ that are we comfortable having right at

2:41:58 ↗ the top of the hill cutting down most of

2:42:00 ↗ that forest and that's actually those

2:42:03 ↗ trees and then leaving trees right next

2:42:05 ↗ to a school site and which of those

2:42:08 ↗ trees are safe to leave right there

2:42:10 ↗ fully exposed to the south winds and

2:42:12 ↗ also the this the more difficult problem

2:42:16 ↗ is almost the east wind which we get

2:42:18 ↗ from the pressure differential between

2:42:20 ↗ Puget Sound being low Eastern Washington

2:42:23 ↗ being high and that's one of the roofs

2:42:25 ↗ get blowing off of Snoqualmie Ridge and

2:42:27 ↗ significant damage has happened in the

2:42:30 ↗ early days of Issaquah Highlands with

2:42:32 ↗ three trees that were left at some of

2:42:34 ↗ the near the wetlands were blown to the

2:42:38 ↗ the west by the east winds so there's

2:42:42 ↗ it's not a cinch plus you're highly

2:42:44 ↗ visible there to the southwest winds

2:42:49 ↗ there's a lot of work that needs to be

2:42:51 ↗ figured out about that traffic there's a

2:42:54 ↗ whole bunch of entitlements to the land

2:42:56 ↗ that was part of Issaquah Highlands to

2:43:00 ↗ the east there and we have to fully

2:43:03 ↗ understand their entitlements and the

2:43:05 ↗ traffic that that would generate

2:43:06 ↗ remember they've done their seat before

2:43:09 ↗ that they did the four to one and a lot

2:43:11 ↗ of other things and earned that traffic

2:43:14 ↗ this property is not doesn't hasn't

2:43:17 ↗ earned anything in terms of traffic and

2:43:19 ↗ the rest and it's not been there's no

2:43:22 ↗ SEPA yet and we don't know how that's

2:43:26 ↗ gonna work the biggest problem is we're

2:43:29 ↗ trying to build a huge elementary school

2:43:31 ↗ up there and it's going to require lots

2:43:34 ↗ of us saying yeah there'll be some kids

2:43:36 ↗ that can walk to it

2:43:37 ↗ but a lot of the kids that go can't go

2:43:40 ↗ to this Grand Ridge school are on the

2:43:42 ↗ Geist are right real close to Green

2:43:44 ↗ Ridge school but they would have to

2:43:46 ↗ cross ninth and Highlands drive to get

2:43:48 ↗ to this school they're gonna be bused so

2:43:50 ↗ by going to this large school which they

2:43:54 ↗ need classrooms admittedly we're

2:43:57 ↗ increasing the traffic we're increasing

2:43:59 ↗ them the size of the buildings the

2:44:01 ↗ heights of the buildings and the parking

2:44:04 ↗ the latest deal is to put all the

2:44:06 ↗ parking underneath the building which

2:44:08 ↗ sounds kind of nice in some ways but at

2:44:11 ↗ the same time we're is going to be our

2:44:13 ↗ community part for the western part of

2:44:16 ↗ the Highlands there's only parking

2:44:19 ↗ underneath their building that's not

2:44:21 ↗ going to be available all the time what

2:44:23 ↗ public access will there be to the

2:44:25 ↗ playground in some of those facilities

2:44:26 ↗ outside of the school day thank you for

2:44:30 ↗ your comments anyone else wishing to

2:44:33 ↗ speak to this this evening heard a plus

2:44:37 ↗ one in the audience anybody else and I

2:44:41 ↗ believe that we are adjourned thank you

2:44:43 ↗ very much at home and a great evening

2:44:57 ↗ you

Approved minutes

Extracted from the next meeting's packet, where this meeting's minutes were approved as a consent-calendar attachment.

Open PDF

Attendance

Council / Members (4)

Stacy Goodman

Victoria Hunt

Tola Marts

Chris Reh

Staff (5)

Mary Lou Pauly, Mayor

Emily Moon, Interim City Administrator

Jim Haney, City Attorney

Christine Eggers, City Clerk

Tisha Gieser, Deputy City Clerk

Excused

Mariah Bettise

Bill Ramos

Paul Winterstein