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 (7)

Mariah Bettise, Excused Absence

Stacy Goodman

Victoria Hunt

Tola Marts

Bill Ramos, Excused Absence

Chris Reh

Paul Winterstein, Excused Absence