City Council Special Meeting · Tuesday, April 19, 2022 · City Council Digest

2061 segments .txt ↗

0:00 ↗ and then we'll start the meeting

0:11 ↗ good evening i would like to call this

0:12 ↗ special meeting of the issaquah city

0:14 ↗ council to order at 6 31 pm

0:18 ↗ as a reminder we continue to have a

0:20 ↗ remote aspect to our meetings so both

0:22 ↗ staff and members of the public may be

0:24 ↗ participating in tonight's meeting

0:26 ↗ remotely via webex

0:28 ↗ also tonight the mayor will be joining

0:30 ↗ us around 7pm and is running late so i

0:33 ↗ am starting the meeting off and we'll

0:35 ↗ turn it over to her when she arrives

0:38 ↗ so at tonight's meeting we have one

0:41 ↗ agenda item which is a quasi-judicial

0:43 ↗ closed record decision on the issaquah

0:45 ↗ school district's providence heights

0:47 ↗ combined elementary and high school

0:49 ↗ campus project

0:51 ↗ please note that because this is a

0:53 ↗ closed record quasi-judicial matter the

0:56 ↗ city council's decision is limited to

0:58 ↗ the record developed by the development

1:00 ↗ commission and no new public comment or

1:02 ↗ testimony will be accepted this evening

1:06 ↗ so with that we'll start with our one

1:08 ↗ and only agenda item which is ab 78350

1:12 ↗ quasi-judicial closed record decision on

1:14 ↗ the esquire school district providence

1:16 ↗ heights project

1:18 ↗ so again the purpose of tonight's

1:19 ↗ meeting is for the city council to

1:21 ↗ deliberate and make a decision on the

1:23 ↗ master site plan msp20001

1:30 ↗ the site development permit sdp 20-0001

1:36 ↗ and five administrative adjustments of

1:38 ↗ standards aas20012

1:43 ↗ aas21-0001

1:48 ↗ aas21-0002

1:52 ↗ aas2

1:56 ↗ aas21-0006

2:01 ↗ for the providence heights consolidated

2:03 ↗ high school and elementary school campus

2:06 ↗ the order of tonight's meeting will be

2:09 ↗ the appearance appearance of fairness

2:11 ↗ disclosures which are necessary due the

2:13 ↗ quasi-judicial nature of these

2:15 ↗ proceedings

2:16 ↗ a staff presentation outlining the

2:18 ↗ project

2:19 ↗ deliberation by the city council which

2:21 ↗ may involve the city council choosing to

2:23 ↗ convene in a closed session to consider

2:25 ↗ this item and finally council will

2:28 ↗ render a decision this evening via

2:30 ↗ resolution if they are ready to do so if

2:32 ↗ not the meeting will be continued to

2:34 ↗ another date

2:36 ↗ so the appearance of fairness

2:38 ↗ disclosures in quasi-judicial actions

2:41 ↗ are those that

2:43 ↗ those actions which determine the legal

2:45 ↗ rights duties or privileges of specific

2:47 ↗ parties in a hearing per state law

2:50 ↗ quasi-judicial decisions require certain

2:52 ↗ disclosures by members of the

2:54 ↗ decision-making body in this case the

2:56 ↗ city council

2:58 ↗ so city clerk would you please proceed

3:00 ↗ with questioning the city council

3:01 ↗ regarding the appearance of fairness

3:03 ↗ disclosures

3:10 ↗ [Music]

3:11 ↗ good evening for the record this is

3:13 ↗ rachel turpin the city attorney hello

3:15 ↗ council can you speak up a little bit i

3:18 ↗ sure can i can speak directly into the

3:20 ↗ michael i'll just bring it closer closer

3:22 ↗ to me i'm short so i have to do that

3:25 ↗ good evening city council

3:29 ↗ staff members of the public

3:33 ↗ this evening's decision is a

3:34 ↗ quasi-judicial decision which means that

3:37 ↗ it is

3:39 ↗ a matter that is

3:40 ↗ governed by what's called the appearance

3:43 ↗ of fairness doctrine

3:45 ↗ under the appearance of fairness

3:46 ↗ doctrine

3:47 ↗ proceedings are required to be fair both

3:50 ↗ in fact and appearance

3:52 ↗ which is similar to a courtroom setting

3:55 ↗ this means that what are called ex parte

3:58 ↗ communications are prohibited

4:00 ↗ ex-parte communications are

4:02 ↗ communications that are outside of the

4:05 ↗ hearing or the meeting between the

4:08 ↗ decision makers which in this case is

4:09 ↗ the city council

4:11 ↗ and either opponents or proponents of

4:14 ↗ the project

4:15 ↗ the or the matter at hand which in this

4:17 ↗ case is the izakawa school district

4:19 ↗ project

4:21 ↗ if such communications have occurred

4:24 ↗ the record of the substance of those

4:26 ↗ communications must be placed on the

4:29 ↗ record in order to allow other

4:31 ↗ interested parties

4:33 ↗ the right to rebut those communications

4:36 ↗ and essentially challenge the council

4:38 ↗ members who engaged in those

4:40 ↗ communications the test of a potential

4:43 ↗ violation of the appearance of fairness

4:45 ↗ doctrine

4:47 ↗ is whether a disinterested person

4:50 ↗ having been apprised of the totality of

4:53 ↗ a decision maker's personal interest in

4:57 ↗ the matter being acted upon

4:59 ↗ be reasonably justified in thinking that

5:02 ↗ partiality may exist

5:06 ↗ decision makers who have a personal

5:08 ↗ interest

5:09 ↗ who have prejudged the issues

5:12 ↗ or

5:14 ↗ have partiality

5:16 ↗ in the matter are disqualified from

5:18 ↗ participating this evening

5:21 ↗ so right now the city clerk is going to

5:24 ↗ ask you all a series of questions that

5:26 ↗ you

5:27 ↗ must answer truthfully

5:35 ↗ all right i'll read the questions and

5:36 ↗ then look for and keep my ears open for

5:39 ↗ any responses so with regards to the

5:41 ↗ outcome of this proceeding do you have a

5:43 ↗ personal interest financial or otherwise

5:46 ↗ in the outcome

5:49 ↗ i hear no response

5:51 ↗ does your employer have an interest

5:53 ↗ financial or otherwise in the outcome

5:57 ↗ there's no response

5:58 ↗ do you have any familial social or

6:00 ↗ business relationships or connections

6:02 ↗ with any of the parties or non-parties

6:05 ↗ who have an interest in the outcome

6:08 ↗ okay i see three hands raised

6:11 ↗ go ahead we'll start with council member

6:12 ↗ d michelle

6:14 ↗ thank you i have a social relationship

6:16 ↗ with issaquah school board member marnie

6:18 ↗ moraldo

6:19 ↗ i am the board chair and she is the

6:21 ↗ executive director for influence of

6:23 ↗ choice a youth substance abuse

6:25 ↗ prevention non-profit organization

6:28 ↗ as elected officials both director

6:30 ↗ maraldo and myself have strictly

6:32 ↗ observed the rules regard regarding

6:34 ↗ quasi-judicial hearings

6:36 ↗ have never spoken about any aspect of

6:38 ↗ the project and have always had at least

6:41 ↗ one other individual and often many

6:43 ↗ others present during our influence to

6:46 ↗ choice meetings so we have never been

6:47 ↗ alone together since

6:49 ↗ both before and since the site plan

6:51 ↗ application was filed

6:53 ↗ our relationship has not biased me for

6:55 ↗ against this project and i am confident

6:58 ↗ that i could remain impartial in these

6:59 ↗ proceedings

7:02 ↗ thank you council president walsh

7:06 ↗ thank you i want to disclose that i have

7:08 ↗ children

7:09 ↗ who are students in the squash school

7:10 ↗ district but this has not biased me in

7:13 ↗ any way for or against the project

7:16 ↗ and i'm confident in my ability to

7:18 ↗ remain impartial

7:21 ↗ council member hunt

7:24 ↗ thank you i have a child who is a

7:27 ↗ student in the issaquah school district

7:28 ↗ but this has not biased me in any way

7:30 ↗ for or against the project and i am

7:32 ↗ confident in my ability to remain

7:34 ↗ impartial

7:37 ↗ council member joe

7:39 ↗ thank you i have one child in the school

7:42 ↗ district

7:43 ↗ and another child that's doing remote

7:44 ↗ learning through a state accredited

7:46 ↗ program

7:49 ↗ but this is not

7:50 ↗ biased me in any way or against the

7:52 ↗ project

7:53 ↗ i'm confident my ability to remain

7:55 ↗ impartial through this process

7:57 ↗ also

7:58 ↗ i want to reveal that i have a social

8:01 ↗ relationship with the superintendent

8:05 ↗ of the school district we are both in

8:06 ↗ the rotary club together

8:10 ↗ i have never spoken to him about this

8:12 ↗ project and he has not approached me in

8:14 ↗ any way shape or form about this project

8:16 ↗ um all of our conversations to the best

8:19 ↗ of my recollection have been

8:21 ↗ social in nature and this

8:23 ↗ project never came up in our

8:24 ↗ conversation so i believe

8:26 ↗ that

8:27 ↗ it has not biased me in any way if we're

8:29 ↗ against

8:30 ↗ the

8:31 ↗ project tonight and i'm confident in my

8:34 ↗ ability to remain impartial through the

8:36 ↗ process

8:39 ↗ thank you are there any other council

8:40 ↗ members with the disclosure

8:45 ↗ all right the next question do you have

8:47 ↗ any special knowledge about the

8:48 ↗ substantive or the merits of this

8:50 ↗ proceeding which would or could cause

8:52 ↗ you to prejudge the outcome

8:57 ↗ i hear no response

9:00 ↗ will there be any prospective employment

9:02 ↗ for you or your family as a result of

9:04 ↗ the decision

9:07 ↗ hear no response

9:09 ↗ do you own or control property within

9:11 ↗ 300 feet of the subject property

9:15 ↗ you're no response

9:17 ↗ have you had any ex parte communications

9:20 ↗ regarding this project

9:22 ↗ i see some hands raised let's start with

9:24 ↗ councilmember martz

9:26 ↗ thank you

9:27 ↗ two things uh first several times over

9:30 ↗ the past two months i have been

9:31 ↗ approached by parishioners at st michael

9:33 ↗ and all angels episcopal church here in

9:35 ↗ issaquah regarding this matter before us

9:37 ↗ this evening in both cases i stopped

9:39 ↗ them before they had been able to convey

9:41 ↗ any information to me and said i would

9:43 ↗ not be able to discuss the matter in any

9:44 ↗ capacity with them due to the

9:46 ↗ quasi-judicial nature of the proceeding

9:48 ↗ conversations did not bias me concerning

9:50 ↗ this project and i am confident i can

9:52 ↗ render an impartial decision in this

9:53 ↗ proceeding

9:55 ↗ secondly on april 18th 2022 i received a

9:58 ↗ letter from the law offices of

10:00 ↗ j richard aramberu pllc email contained

10:04 ↗ an attachment entitled comment to icc

10:07 ↗ dot ppua re-isd it was immediately

10:10 ↗ apparent to me that this email and the

10:11 ↗ letter likely related to this project

10:13 ↗ which is a quasi-judicial closed record

10:15 ↗ decision accordingly i did not open or

10:17 ↗ read the attachment i have not been

10:18 ↗ biased by the unsolicited receipt of the

10:20 ↗ letter which i did not read and i am

10:22 ↗ confident i can render an impartial

10:23 ↗ decision in this proceeding

10:27 ↗ thank you council president walsh

10:30 ↗ thank you on april 18

10:32 ↗ 2022 i also received a letter from the

10:35 ↗ law offices of richard aramburu pllc

10:39 ↗ that email contained the same attachment

10:41 ↗ entitled comment to icc.ppua

10:44 ↗ re uh isd

10:46 ↗ and it was immediately apparent that it

10:48 ↗ was related to a quasi-digital matter

10:51 ↗ and so i immediately emailed our legal

10:54 ↗ team to make sure that we should not

10:56 ↗ read it i have not opened the attachment

10:58 ↗ and i have not been biased by the

11:00 ↗ unsolicited receipt of the letter which

11:02 ↗ i didn't read i'm confident i can re uh

11:06 ↗ render an impartial decision in this

11:07 ↗ proceeding

11:10 ↗ thank you deputy council president hall

11:13 ↗ thank you very much similarly similarly

11:16 ↗ to what you've just heard

11:17 ↗ yesterday on april 18th i received that

11:20 ↗ same letter from the law offices of

11:22 ↗ uh j richard aramburu pllc which

11:25 ↗ conceived that same attachment comment

11:27 ↗ to icc ppua regarding isd

11:31 ↗ and it was immediately obvious to me

11:33 ↗ that it was

11:35 ↗ a form of communication that i'm not

11:37 ↗ allowed to open and read as we're in a

11:39 ↗ quasi-judicial close record decision

11:42 ↗ and i do not believe that i've been

11:44 ↗ biased by the unsolicited receipt of

11:46 ↗ this letter and i'm confident i can

11:48 ↗ render a impartial decision in this

11:50 ↗ proceeding thanks

11:52 ↗ thank you councilmember ray

11:55 ↗ thank you on april 18th 2022 i received

11:58 ↗ a letter from the law offices of j um

12:00 ↗ richard ambrou pllc the letter contained

12:03 ↗ an attachment entitled comments to

12:05 ↗ icc.ppua

12:08 ↗ regarding his claw school district it

12:10 ↗ was immediately apparent to me that this

12:11 ↗ email was likely related to the project

12:14 ↗ which is a quasi-judicial closed record

12:16 ↗ decision accordingly i did not open the

12:18 ↗ attachment

12:21 ↗ i have not been biased or by the

12:24 ↗ unsolicited receipt of this letter which

12:26 ↗ i did not read and i am confident that i

12:28 ↗ can render an impartial decision in this

12:30 ↗ proceedings

12:32 ↗ councilmember hunt

12:36 ↗ thank you on april 18 2022 i received a

12:39 ↗ letter from the law offices of j richard

12:41 ↗ arambru pllc the email contained an

12:44 ↗ attachment entitled comment to icc.ppua

12:49 ↗ reisd it was immediately apparent to me

12:52 ↗ that this email and the letter likely

12:53 ↗ related to this project which is

12:55 ↗ quasi-judicial closed record decision

12:57 ↗ accordingly i did not open or read the

12:59 ↗ attachment and i have not been biased by

13:02 ↗ the unsolicited receipt of this letter

13:03 ↗ which i did not read and i am confident

13:05 ↗ i can render an impartial decision in

13:07 ↗ this proceeding

13:10 ↗ council member d michelle

13:12 ↗ thank you on april 18th 2022 i received

13:15 ↗ a letter from the law offices of j

13:17 ↗ richard aramberu

13:19 ↗ p pllc the email contained an attachment

13:22 ↗ entitled quote comment to icc.ppua

13:27 ↗ ray isd unquote it was immediately

13:31 ↗ apparent to me that this email and the

13:32 ↗ letter likely related to this project

13:35 ↗ which is a quasi-judicial closed record

13:37 ↗ decision accordingly i did not open or

13:40 ↗ read the attachment i have not been

13:42 ↗ biased by the unsolicited receipt of the

13:44 ↗ letter which i did not read and i am

13:47 ↗ confident i can render an impartial

13:49 ↗ decision in this proceeding

13:52 ↗ council member joe

13:54 ↗ i have a question for our city attorney

13:56 ↗ how far back

13:58 ↗ do

13:59 ↗ contacts need to be revealed in other

14:01 ↗ words when was the record closed

14:10 ↗ it let me just ask another way

14:12 ↗ was it closed in august of 2021

14:15 ↗ you would want to reveal any ex parte

14:17 ↗ communications you had after the the

14:20 ↗ project application

14:22 ↗ came in which was what date

14:26 ↗ ms dollywood can you remind me

14:39 ↗ september 2020

14:41 ↗ okay

14:43 ↗ so um

14:44 ↗ first on april 18 2022 i received a

14:47 ↗ letter from the law office of richard

14:49 ↗ arambu pllc the email containing an

14:52 ↗ attachment entitled comment

14:56 ↗ i-c-c-p-p-u-a-r-e-i-s-d was immediately

14:58 ↗ apparent to me that this email and the

15:00 ↗ letter likely related to the project

15:02 ↗ which is quasi-judicial and closed at a

15:04 ↗ closed record decision

15:06 ↗ accordingly i did not open or read the

15:08 ↗ attachment

15:09 ↗ i have not been biased by the received

15:11 ↗ letter which i

15:12 ↗ did not read and i'm confident i can

15:14 ↗ render an impartial decision in this

15:16 ↗ proceeding

15:18 ↗ secondly during the campaign

15:21 ↗ of

15:22 ↗ council member joe

15:24 ↗ you don't have to disclose

15:26 ↗ communications you had prior to

15:28 ↗ election yes correct fantastic thank you

15:36 ↗ all right let's move to the next

15:38 ↗ question

15:42 ↗ do you believe you can sit and hear this

15:44 ↗ matter fairly and impartially both as to

15:46 ↗ the respective positions of the

15:48 ↗ proponents and the

15:49 ↗ opponents of this matter

15:55 ↗ might you unmute for

15:57 ↗ what i do

15:59 ↗ yes yes acknowledge yes yes

16:02 ↗ yes yes

16:05 ↗ thank you for those um who are just able

16:07 ↗ to hear you

16:09 ↗ all right so now um

16:11 ↗ we have some questions for the audience

16:15 ↗ based on the information that you just

16:17 ↗ heard from the city council who is

16:20 ↗ making the decision in this matter do

16:22 ↗ any of you either in person here or

16:25 ↗ attending virtually wish to challenge

16:27 ↗ the participation of any council member

16:30 ↗ based on the appearance of fairness

16:32 ↗ doctrine

16:34 ↗ if you have an objection to them

16:35 ↗ participating in the proceedings

16:38 ↗ you can if you're in the room you can

16:40 ↗ raise your your physical hand if you're

16:42 ↗ participating virtually you can raise

16:44 ↗ your virtual hand or send me the host a

16:47 ↗ chat message

16:49 ↗ when i call on you please state the name

16:51 ↗ of the council member and the reason why

16:53 ↗ you believe they should be disqualified

16:55 ↗ from this matter

16:57 ↗ i'm going to take a moment here to

16:59 ↗ monitor our virtual attendees

17:11 ↗ all right i see at least one hand raised

17:14 ↗ i'm gonna wait just another moment

17:18 ↗ and i see a hand raised in the room as

17:21 ↗ well

17:22 ↗ so uh let's start with the the first

17:25 ↗ hand i saw raised was from our virtual

17:27 ↗ attendee and then ma'am you are welcome

17:29 ↗ to come forward so mr aramberu i see

17:32 ↗ your hand raised

17:35 ↗ just a moment here i'm going to make you

17:37 ↗ a panelist so that you can unmute and

17:39 ↗ address the council

17:43 ↗ mr arambru just a reminder that because

17:46 ↗ we're not taking public comment on this

17:48 ↗ issue this evening please keep your

17:50 ↗ statements limited to the reason you

17:52 ↗ believe the council members to be

17:54 ↗ disqualified

17:58 ↗ okay thank you can

17:59 ↗ members of the council hear me

18:02 ↗ we can

18:04 ↗ good thank you very much um i have uh

18:08 ↗ two or three

18:10 ↗ objections based upon the appearance of

18:13 ↗ fairness doctrine

18:14 ↗ first of all

18:17 ↗ i have

18:19 ↗ received

18:20 ↗ an announcement sheet from the issaquah

18:24 ↗ school district which was dated october

18:26 ↗ 28 2001.

18:28 ↗ excuse me

18:29 ↗ 2021

18:32 ↗ and in that announcement sheet

18:34 ↗ it states that

18:38 ↗ member weaver director maraldo and

18:41 ↗ superintendent ron thiele met with

18:44 ↗ members of the city of issaquah

18:46 ↗ leadership

18:47 ↗ at 5 pm on october 19 2021 via zoom

18:54 ↗ director weaver shared what they

18:57 ↗ discussed and one of the items they

18:58 ↗ discussed

19:00 ↗ was progress on district construction

19:03 ↗ projects including

19:05 ↗ hiring an outside expert consultant

19:08 ↗ as the district's

19:10 ↗ state environmental policy act

19:12 ↗ responsible official for the high school

19:14 ↗ for elementary 17

19:16 ↗ project located on the providence

19:19 ↗ heights property

19:21 ↗ that appears to be an undisclosed

19:24 ↗ ex-party communication

19:27 ↗ with at least two members of the

19:29 ↗ district

19:30 ↗ board and the superintendent with

19:33 ↗ unnamed members

19:34 ↗ of the

19:36 ↗ islam city council which appear to be

19:38 ↗ the uh leadership

19:41 ↗ uh so we would we would object to

19:44 ↗ those members of the council who have

19:47 ↗ not disclosed this meeting uh with the

19:50 ↗ isco school district that occurred on

19:53 ↗ october 19

19:55 ↗ 2021.

20:00 ↗ uh

20:01 ↗ would you like me to state my second

20:03 ↗ objection or would you like to resolve

20:06 ↗ this uh the first one

20:07 ↗ now

20:09 ↗ let's go through them all please

20:12 ↗ second objection is that i have

20:14 ↗ recognized that several members of the

20:17 ↗ fiscal city council have identified that

20:20 ↗ they have children who

20:23 ↗ are enrolled in the schools of the

20:25 ↗ issaquah school district i believe that

20:28 ↗ to be a conflict of interest based upon

20:31 ↗ family relationships

20:33 ↗ the proposal before you now

20:36 ↗ will

20:38 ↗ provide schools for

20:42 ↗ district residents

20:44 ↗ and one or more

20:46 ↗ members of the issaquah city council may

20:48 ↗ have children that would attend those

20:50 ↗ schools

20:51 ↗ i believe that's a conflict of interest

20:54 ↗ and that those members who have children

20:56 ↗ in the issaquah school district should

20:59 ↗ recuse themselves from these hearings

21:06 ↗ the the third matter

21:08 ↗ has to do with the record before the

21:10 ↗ council

21:13 ↗ numerous uh the the record here is

21:16 ↗ substantial more than 6 300 pages

21:19 ↗ uh and

21:21 ↗ and video

21:22 ↗ materials from the public hearings that

21:25 ↗ were held particularly on march 3rd

21:28 ↗ 2021.

21:30 ↗ i

21:31 ↗ i believe it would be a violation the

21:33 ↗ appearance of fairness doctrine

21:35 ↗ if

21:37 ↗ one or more council members did not

21:39 ↗ review the videos of what the public

21:42 ↗ said at the hearing and what the public

21:45 ↗ submitted

21:46 ↗ to the development commission

21:48 ↗ during the march 3rd hearing

21:51 ↗ and failure to

21:54 ↗ review and be familiar with those

21:55 ↗ materials in advance of making this

21:58 ↗ decision would violate the appearance of

22:00 ↗ fairness doctrine

22:02 ↗ so those would be my three objections to

22:06 ↗ council members i'm ready to provide

22:09 ↗ more detail

22:11 ↗ if council members or staff has

22:12 ↗ questions of me thank you

22:17 ↗ thank you mr ramboru

22:22 ↗ ma'am i know we had someone in the

22:24 ↗ audience who'd indicated you're welcome

22:26 ↗ to come up to the

22:28 ↗ dice here

22:45 ↗ i rise on a similar issue as mr

22:48 ↗ haramburu

22:50 ↗ is that there as much as i like to see

22:52 ↗ parents of students actively involved i

22:55 ↗ do think that those students could in

22:57 ↗ future benefit from these schools and

23:00 ↗ that would be a conflict of interest

23:03 ↗ in the decision

23:04 ↗ hey ma'am can i have you state your name

23:06 ↗ oh i'm sorry i'm carol schmidt

23:08 ↗ providence point resident and school

23:10 ↗ teacher at bellevue high

23:12 ↗ thank you

23:20 ↗ are there any other individuals who

23:23 ↗ would like

23:25 ↗ to uh challenge

23:28 ↗ the council's participation a council

23:30 ↗ member's participation

23:33 ↗ all right i don't see any other raised

23:34 ↗ hands in the meeting room i also don't

23:37 ↗ see any other raised hands among our

23:40 ↗ virtual attendees

23:44 ↗ okay so at this time we have received

23:47 ↗ objection to the participation of

23:49 ↗ certain council members and so i will

23:52 ↗ ask them if they wish to respond the

23:55 ↗ council members may either refuse to

23:58 ↗ disqualify a council member who does not

24:00 ↗ feel that their participation in the

24:02 ↗ vote reflects any bias for or against

24:04 ↗ the project

24:05 ↗ and that they can decide impartially can

24:08 ↗ refuse to disqualify themselves they can

24:11 ↗ either rely on what they said earlier

24:12 ↗ during disclosures or essentially

24:14 ↗ restate what they said then at this time

24:18 ↗ or you can disqualify a council member

24:21 ↗ who disqualifies themselves must leave

24:22 ↗ the hearing room and may not participate

24:24 ↗ further concerning the applications

24:27 ↗ and so

24:28 ↗ um

24:30 ↗ you have one point yes council president

24:33 ↗ i'm sorry for the interruption but i do

24:34 ↗ see that i've received a chat message

24:36 ↗ from someone else who may um wish to

24:39 ↗ um make a challenge so if okay let's

24:41 ↗ hear that thank you thank you so i see

24:44 ↗ someone who's whose display name is mg

24:48 ↗ i'm going to make you a panelist now so

24:50 ↗ that you can unmute and

24:52 ↗ make your challenge if you'd like

25:06 ↗ mg you've been elevated and should be

25:08 ↗ able to unmute

25:10 ↗ thank you

25:11 ↗ mary doritas

25:14 ↗ can you hear me

25:15 ↗ yes

25:16 ↗ thank you

25:18 ↗ resident of issaquah and i object based

25:21 ↗ on the press release that was

25:24 ↗ on the issaquah school district website

25:27 ↗ regarding the meeting

25:29 ↗ in october between

25:32 ↗ staff and

25:34 ↗ city council

25:36 ↗ and

25:37 ↗ school district thank you

25:41 ↗ thank you and council president i don't

25:43 ↗ see anyone else

25:44 ↗ wishing to make a challenge

25:47 ↗ okay so i was going to start with the

25:51 ↗ um

25:52 ↗ october

25:53 ↗ meeting of 2021 at that time the

25:58 ↗ leadership was council member hunt and

26:00 ↗ council member ray

26:02 ↗ and so i would like to give each of you

26:04 ↗ an opportunity to respond regarding that

26:09 ↗ meeting

26:18 ↗ thank you president walsh

26:22 ↗ to the best of my ability to remember i

26:25 ↗ do not recall discussing this project in

26:29 ↗ any way

26:30 ↗ um

26:31 ↗ so i

26:33 ↗ and i also

26:34 ↗ am not familiar with this press release

26:36 ↗ uh

26:39 ↗ i can

26:40 ↗ look through my notes to see if i have

26:41 ↗ any record but i i

26:44 ↗ do not i believe that we did not discuss

26:46 ↗ it and i also believe that any

26:48 ↗ discussions we had with the school board

26:51 ↗ would be about

26:52 ↗ other issues of joint interest and would

26:54 ↗ not bias me on this project

27:01 ↗ thank you president walsh

27:03 ↗ it was a matter and it still is a matter

27:05 ↗ of standing course once a quarter

27:07 ↗ esque city council leadership meets with

27:09 ↗ the school district

27:10 ↗ to talk about a wide range of of common

27:13 ↗ interest

27:14 ↗ um

27:15 ↗ i i

27:16 ↗ do not recall this meeting and or the

27:18 ↗ topic

27:20 ↗ and i don't believe that

27:22 ↗ whatever was the discussion of that day

27:25 ↗ would uh

27:27 ↗ would influence me

27:28 ↗ or bias me or make it so i could not

27:30 ↗ make an impartial decision in this

27:32 ↗ matter

27:37 ↗ okay and then going through the

27:39 ↗ remainder

27:41 ↗ of the items i believe we heard

27:44 ↗ several instances of individuals talking

27:47 ↗ about

27:49 ↗ the three of us who have students at the

27:52 ↗ issaquah school district so i'll call on

27:54 ↗ myself first and then

27:56 ↗ go through between the other two

28:00 ↗ i absolutely have uh two students at the

28:03 ↗ issaquah school district um

28:07 ↗ and

28:08 ↗ there is no way of knowing whether or

28:10 ↗ not they would or wouldn't attend this

28:12 ↗ particular school um but just like

28:16 ↗ anyone here who might have a child um

28:20 ↗ at any point or adopt adopt a child

28:23 ↗ there that is a city-wide um set of

28:29 ↗ benefits i guess i would say so there i

28:32 ↗ do not believe in any way that

28:34 ↗ having a student in the school district

28:37 ↗ um has biased me for or against this

28:40 ↗ project and i do not believe it would um

28:43 ↗ keep me from

28:44 ↗ being impartial in the ability to decide

28:47 ↗ this

28:48 ↗ on this project

28:50 ↗ so

28:50 ↗ i'll give you a moment to get settled

28:53 ↗ while we continue through the appearance

28:55 ↗ of fairness

28:57 ↗ and i will go to council member joe do

29:00 ↗ you want to respond on that item

29:03 ↗ thank you council president walsh

29:07 ↗ i

29:08 ↗ do have one child in the school district

29:10 ↗ and one child that i kept out of the

29:11 ↗ school district for safety reasons

29:14 ↗ during covet and she is

29:16 ↗ doing remote learning

29:19 ↗ i don't believe that

29:21 ↗ having children in the school district

29:24 ↗ in any way would

29:26 ↗ bias me for or against the project and i

29:29 ↗ believe that i'm confident my ability to

29:30 ↗ remain impartial and decide

29:32 ↗ the issues before the council tonight

29:34 ↗ without fear or favor thank you

29:38 ↗ and council member hunt

29:40 ↗ i have a

29:42 ↗ child in the squad school district but

29:44 ↗ as i stated earlier i do not believe

29:46 ↗ that this biases me for or against the

29:48 ↗ project and i believe i can be impartial

29:51 ↗ in this matter

29:54 ↗ okay and i believe there was

29:57 ↗ one other

29:59 ↗ um

30:00 ↗ objection

30:02 ↗ i am not remembering it off the top of

30:04 ↗ my head from mr or umbreo

30:09 ↗ clerk or

30:09 ↗ [Music]

30:11 ↗ yes he i i

30:14 ↗ as i understood it he was stating that

30:17 ↗ if a council member did not review the

30:20 ↗ public comment provided in the record

30:22 ↗ that that would be

30:24 ↗ a possible disqualification

30:28 ↗ well first of all i disagree but

30:32 ↗ i believe that everyone reviewed it

30:35 ↗ is that correct

30:37 ↗ yes yes

30:39 ↗ then it's not an issue yes

30:46 ↗ okay so at this point i believe we have

30:49 ↗ heard from all of the council members

30:51 ↗ related to those particular objections

30:55 ↗ that were heard from the public both in

30:57 ↗ person and virtual

30:59 ↗ and all of the council members have

31:01 ↗ stated the reasons why they

31:05 ↗ feel they

31:07 ↗ will refuse to disqualify so are there

31:09 ↗ any other

31:10 ↗ things that need to happen within this

31:12 ↗ appearance of fairness doctrine um

31:16 ↗ at this time

31:19 ↗ no

31:20 ↗ okay

31:21 ↗ so mayor are you ready to take over on

31:23 ↗ this one particular item

31:28 ↗ thank you council president and

31:29 ↗ apologies to to the group and to the

31:32 ↗ audience for being tardy this evening

31:35 ↗ um looking at the script it appears that

31:37 ↗ you might be moving on to stop

31:38 ↗ presentation at this time

31:40 ↗ so next we will receive a presentation

31:42 ↗ from christina hayworth planning

31:44 ↗ consultant

31:48 ↗ christina i've just given you

31:50 ↗ those presentation

31:53 ↗ privileges

31:55 ↗ great thank you so much can everyone

31:57 ↗ hear me okay

32:02 ↗ yes yes

32:04 ↗ okay

32:05 ↗ uh great um i am sharing my screen right

32:08 ↗ now

32:10 ↗ um can everyone see it okay

32:14 ↗ yes

32:15 ↗ fantastic thank you

32:18 ↗ all right so as stated earlier tonight's

32:21 ↗ meeting is a closed record review

32:24 ↗ review is limited to items already in

32:26 ↗ the project record that includes the

32:28 ↗ content of this presentation no new

32:31 ↗ information is presented or added to the

32:33 ↗ record with this presentation tonight

32:38 ↗ i will be going over the

32:41 ↗ project uh talking a little bit about

32:43 ↗ the timeline the permit process and next

32:45 ↗ steps reviewing the decision criteria

32:48 ↗ and then opening it up for city council

32:51 ↗ q a

32:55 ↗ the property is located in the northern

32:58 ↗ end of the city

33:01 ↗ one second i'm going to go to the clerk

33:02 ↗ um clerk is it appropriate for someone

33:04 ↗ in the audience to do a point of order

33:06 ↗ no that's the right of the council okay

33:09 ↗ thank you so we will not be recognizing

33:11 ↗ the point of order

33:16 ↗ may i continue

33:18 ↗ um let's ask the city clerk or rachel

33:21 ↗ give an answer the mayor does not have

33:23 ↗ to attest to fairness because the mayor

33:25 ↗ is not going to be decision maker in

33:26 ↗ this proceeding unless there is a tie

33:29 ↗ in which case the mayor then will do the

33:32 ↗ appearance of fairness disclosures at

33:34 ↗ that time

33:37 ↗ thank you rachel continue

33:39 ↗ thank you very much

33:41 ↗ um okay the property is located in the

33:44 ↗ northern end of the city in the

33:46 ↗ providence point neighborhood along the

33:48 ↗ jurisdictional boundary between issaquah

33:50 ↗ and sammamish the site access is from

33:53 ↗ 228th avenue southeast and the city of

33:55 ↗ samamish owns this roadway

34:00 ↗ the site was formerly developed as the

34:02 ↗ providence heights college which has

34:03 ↗ since been demolished

34:05 ↗ the property currently consists of a

34:07 ↗ central clearing as shown in this aerial

34:09 ↗ photograph some residual concrete and a

34:12 ↗ water tower

34:14 ↗ access is from two places on 228th

34:17 ↗ avenue southeast the first is a little

34:19 ↗ bit north of the center line of that or

34:22 ↗ center of that eastern property line

34:24 ↗ the second is at the southernmost tip of

34:27 ↗ that eastern property line

34:29 ↗ there are several critical areas on site

34:32 ↗ wetland b which is in the southwestern

34:34 ↗ portion of the property this is a

34:36 ↗ category 4 wetland it's quite small

34:39 ↗ wetlands c also a category 4 wetland

34:42 ↗ located in the southern portion of the

34:44 ↗ property along the existing access road

34:48 ↗ providence heights loop

34:50 ↗ some man-made steep slopes along 228th

34:53 ↗ avenue southeast

34:55 ↗ and

34:56 ↗ at the southern end of the

34:58 ↗ frontage and a critical aquifer recharge

35:00 ↗ area along the northern frontage of

35:02 ↗ 228th avenue southeast

35:06 ↗ the project proposal consists of a new

35:08 ↗ consolidated high school and elementary

35:10 ↗ school campus

35:12 ↗ the high school will be located in the

35:13 ↗ southern portion of the property will

35:15 ↗ serve a maximum capacity of

35:18 ↗ approximately

35:19 ↗ 1823 students and 150 staff at full

35:22 ↗ build out

35:24 ↗ the initial construction includes

35:26 ↗ accessory athletic facilities and future

35:29 ↗ phases include a 10 000 square foot

35:31 ↗ addition and up to four portable

35:33 ↗ buildings

35:34 ↗ the elementary school will be located

35:36 ↗ along the western portion of the

35:38 ↗ property

35:39 ↗ serving a maximum capacity of 744

35:42 ↗ students and 75 staff at full build out

35:45 ↗ includes an accessory outdoor playground

35:47 ↗ with the initial construction and future

35:50 ↗ phases include up to four portable

35:52 ↗ buildings

35:53 ↗ the project also includes related site

35:55 ↗ infrastructure like roadways uh

35:58 ↗ non-motorized pathways utilities and

36:00 ↗ other kinds of operational features like

36:02 ↗ the bus loop

36:03 ↗ i'll now go through

36:05 ↗ the project components

36:07 ↗ so item number one is the high school

36:10 ↗ one a is the addition the 10 000 square

36:13 ↗ foot edition that i mentioned on the

36:14 ↗ previous slide

36:16 ↗ 1b

36:17 ↗ is the location of future portable

36:19 ↗ buildings

36:20 ↗ the elementary school is shown as number

36:22 ↗ two

36:24 ↗ the future portables are shown as to a

36:27 ↗ in the center of the property is the

36:30 ↗ stadium and track there's a grandstand

36:34 ↗ on the west side and visitor bleachers

36:36 ↗ on the east side of the track

36:39 ↗ scoreboard to the north facing southward

36:42 ↗ a ball field and

36:44 ↗ complex and plaza so that's a baseball

36:46 ↗ field and a softball field around a

36:49 ↗ central plaza identified as number four

36:52 ↗ in the northern portion of the property

36:56 ↗ number five is the central parking

36:58 ↗ garage with rooftop tennis courts

37:01 ↗ number six is the bus pickup and

37:03 ↗ drop-off

37:04 ↗ loop and parking area

37:06 ↗ number seven is the entirety of the

37:09 ↗ green shading this is the proposed

37:11 ↗ vegetated buffer uh

37:14 ↗ surrounding the entire property

37:17 ↗ and then number eight is the primary

37:19 ↗ access which is a signalized entry that

37:23 ↗ is also associated with some additional

37:25 ↗ frontage improvements and roadway

37:27 ↗ improvements

37:28 ↗ number nine

37:29 ↗ is an emergency vehicular access so this

37:32 ↗ is used only by

37:35 ↗ emergency response vehicles such as

37:37 ↗ those owned by eastside firing rescue

37:42 ↗ as part of the project the applicant is

37:45 ↗ requesting five administrative

37:46 ↗ adjustments of standards all of which

37:48 ↗ are contemplated in the issaquah

37:50 ↗ municipal code and or the central isoqua

37:52 ↗ development and design standards were

37:54 ↗ applicable

37:55 ↗ aas's are usually decided by the cpd

37:58 ↗ director but they meet the criteria for

38:00 ↗ consolidation in imc 18.04

38:05 ↗ and are therefore elevated to the level

38:07 ↗ 5 process with the master site plan and

38:09 ↗ site development permit for a decision

38:11 ↗ made by city council

38:16 ↗ the first request is to reduce the

38:19 ↗ minimum far from 0.75 to 0.42

38:24 ↗ just so that we're all on the same page

38:26 ↗ far is the ratio between building square

38:30 ↗ footage and the developable site area on

38:32 ↗ the property

38:33 ↗ a higher far means that there is more

38:36 ↗ building square footage on the site a

38:38 ↗ lower far means there's less building

38:40 ↗ square footage on the site the far as

38:42 ↗ you can see in this diagram uses total

38:44 ↗ square footage of the building not just

38:46 ↗ the footprint

38:49 ↗ this adjustment is allowed by code when

38:51 ↗ the reduction is less than 50 percent

38:53 ↗ and is for operational features or

38:55 ↗ academic curriculum

38:57 ↗ the proposed reduction results in less

38:59 ↗ building mass on the property than would

39:01 ↗ otherwise be required

39:04 ↗ the second requested aas is to reduce

39:08 ↗ the minimum tree retention requirement

39:10 ↗ from 25 to 23

39:13 ↗ this is allowed by code

39:15 ↗ uh specifically by reference to the

39:17 ↗ central a squad

39:19 ↗ design development and design standards

39:21 ↗ the cidds when meeting all applicable

39:24 ↗ criteria

39:25 ↗ the project

39:26 ↗ complies with applicable tree retention

39:28 ↗ requirements though

39:30 ↗ retaining about 26 of the trees on the

39:33 ↗ site and so therefore an aas is not

39:35 ↗ actually required

39:40 ↗ the third request is the authorization

39:43 ↗ of shared parking facilities

39:46 ↗ the applicant's proposal is to share

39:48 ↗ on-site parking between daytime school

39:50 ↗ uses and after-school events

39:53 ↗ this reduces the total amount of on-site

39:55 ↗ surface and structured parking needed

39:57 ↗ for the project and is allowed by the

39:59 ↗ issaquah municipal code when a parking

40:01 ↗ study supports the sharing scheme as is

40:03 ↗ the case for this project

40:05 ↗ requirements

40:07 ↗ for daytime parking are met under the

40:09 ↗ proposal

40:10 ↗ and isd has to implement uh based on the

40:13 ↗ recommended conditions of approval and

40:16 ↗ the transportation

40:17 ↗ impact analysis and a special event

40:20 ↗ management plan in the case of overflow

40:22 ↗ during particularly popular events

40:28 ↗ the fourth requested aas is relief from

40:31 ↗ providing continuous non-motorized

40:32 ↗ walkways on both sides of certain

40:34 ↗ internal access roadways that are

40:36 ↗ identified in red here

40:38 ↗ on the diagram on the screen

40:40 ↗ so this is along the east side of the

40:42 ↗ parking garage one walkway would be

40:44 ↗ provided

40:45 ↗ along the east side of the road which is

40:48 ↗ closer to the trees

40:51 ↗ um and then along the east side of the

40:53 ↗ high school building

40:55 ↗ um they are requesting in

40:58 ↗ a certain area to have only

41:00 ↗ uh one side of the the road have a a

41:03 ↗ walkway and then along the actual high

41:05 ↗ school building itself

41:07 ↗ not allowing pedestrian access

41:10 ↗ in that area

41:11 ↗ this is important for pedestrian safety

41:13 ↗ due to the utility enclosure

41:16 ↗ along the

41:17 ↗ south eastern portion of the building

41:21 ↗ then the last requested aas

41:25 ↗ is to reduce the total number of

41:27 ↗ non-motorized street frontage

41:28 ↗ connections

41:30 ↗ from eight to three

41:33 ↗ there are two connections at the main

41:35 ↗ entry and one barrier free connection up

41:37 ↗ at the south end of the property

41:40 ↗ this request would improve tree

41:42 ↗ retention by limiting grading and

41:44 ↗ impervious surfaces in the forested

41:46 ↗ hillside along 228th avenue southeast

41:49 ↗ and wouldn't negatively impact site

41:51 ↗ accessibility because pedestrians would

41:53 ↗ continue to arrive from or would

41:56 ↗ not continue but would start to arrive

41:57 ↗ from the north or south after project

42:00 ↗ development

42:04 ↗ the permits that you are reviewing

42:06 ↗ tonight follow the level five review

42:09 ↗ process which means that staff does an

42:12 ↗ initial technical review and provides a

42:14 ↗ recommendation to the development

42:16 ↗ commission

42:17 ↗ the development commission holds the

42:19 ↗ public hearing

42:20 ↗ takes public testimony closes the

42:22 ↗ project record then deliberates and

42:24 ↗ recommen makes a recommendation that is

42:26 ↗ forwarded to the city council for review

42:29 ↗ city council decides using the closed

42:31 ↗ record to make a decision once a

42:33 ↗ decision is made that decision is

42:35 ↗ appealable to king county superior court

42:41 ↗ the decision is based on criteria of

42:44 ↗ approval outlined in the issaquah

42:47 ↗ municipal code

42:49 ↗ staff reviewed the application materials

42:51 ↗ against all applicable criteria of

42:53 ↗ approval for the various permits

42:55 ↗ for the master site plan there are 13

42:58 ↗ and i'll refer you to

43:00 ↗ the staff report page 154

43:03 ↗ for an analysis of those criteria the

43:06 ↗ criteria range pretty broadly from

43:08 ↗ compatibility with adjacent uses to

43:11 ↗ phasing plans internal design continuity

43:14 ↗ vehicular and non-vehicular circulation

43:16 ↗ and others summarized here on this slide

43:19 ↗ staff found that with the recommended

43:21 ↗ conditions the proposal complies with

43:23 ↗ all 13 criteria

43:27 ↗ there are three criteria for the site

43:29 ↗ development permit

43:31 ↗ and the analysis of those begins on page

43:34 ↗ 161 of the staff report

43:38 ↗ those criteria include compliance with

43:40 ↗ the comprehensive plan compliance with

43:42 ↗ the code and other applicable standards

43:45 ↗ and compliance with the design criteria

43:47 ↗ checklist that is adopted as appendix 2

43:50 ↗ of chapter

43:51 ↗ 18.07 of the assaq municipal code

43:55 ↗ with the recommended conditions staff

43:57 ↗ found that the proposal complies with

43:59 ↗ these three criteria

44:03 ↗ the criteria of approval for the aas is

44:06 ↗ vary in number and location throughout

44:08 ↗ the code

44:10 ↗ and so i'll just walk through them as uh

44:13 ↗ as quickly as possible here um but if

44:16 ↗ you've got questions about where to find

44:17 ↗ more information within the project

44:19 ↗ record please let me know when we get to

44:21 ↗ q a

44:22 ↗ for the

44:24 ↗ floor area ratio reduction

44:27 ↗ there are three criteria of approval

44:30 ↗ starting on page 37 of the staff report

44:33 ↗ including that the reduction is the

44:34 ↗ least amount necessary for operational

44:36 ↗ functions and academic curriculum

44:38 ↗ uh that the reduction is no greater than

44:40 ↗ 50 percent of the minimum far

44:42 ↗ and that the reduction will be equal to

44:44 ↗ or better in fulfilling the purpose and

44:46 ↗ intent of the community facilities

44:48 ↗ facilities standards with the

44:51 ↗ recommended conditions staff found that

44:53 ↗ the proposal complies with these

44:54 ↗ criteria

44:57 ↗ the criteria for tree retention

44:59 ↗ modification are in the central issaquah

45:03 ↗ development and design

45:04 ↗ standard cidds chapter

45:06 ↗ chapter 10

45:08 ↗ the analysis of this begins on page 90

45:10 ↗ of the staff report

45:12 ↗ there are six criteria one of which is

45:14 ↗ optional

45:15 ↗ and based on the current project

45:17 ↗ proposal and submitted arborist

45:19 ↗ information the applica the applicant

45:22 ↗ the project complies with tree retention

45:24 ↗ requirements without the need for an aes

45:30 ↗ there are seven criteria in two

45:32 ↗ different code sections required to

45:34 ↗ share parking

45:36 ↗ uh including providing adequate

45:38 ↗ documentation

45:40 ↗ to support that reduction there is a

45:43 ↗ parking section in the transportation

45:45 ↗ impact analysis

45:47 ↗ and as

45:49 ↗ conditioned we found that the proposal

45:50 ↗ complies with all of the applicable

45:52 ↗ criteria in both code sections

45:58 ↗ there are three criteria to modify

46:00 ↗ requirements for non-motorized walkways

46:02 ↗ including consistency with complement

46:05 ↗ code requirements reduction of impacts

46:07 ↗ compliance with the intent

46:10 ↗ there's this fourth additional approval

46:12 ↗ criteria

46:13 ↗ these are optional none were specified

46:15 ↗ by the cpd director so as conditioned

46:18 ↗ the proposal complies with all

46:20 ↗ applicable criteria in the code

46:25 ↗ the same criteria apply for the

46:27 ↗ reduction of public street frontage

46:30 ↗ connections

46:31 ↗ again no additional approval criteria

46:34 ↗ were

46:34 ↗ specified for the for the request and as

46:38 ↗ conditioned we found that the proposal

46:39 ↗ complies with the applicable

46:41 ↗ review criteria

46:44 ↗ based on the applications the submitted

46:47 ↗ plans and technical reports all of the

46:49 ↗ attachments in the project record and

46:51 ↗ the analysis presented in the staff

46:53 ↗ report the development commission did

46:55 ↗ recommend approval of the master site

46:57 ↗ plan site development permit and all

47:00 ↗ five aas applications subject to the i

47:03 ↗ believe it's 57

47:05 ↗ land use conditions that are presented

47:07 ↗ in the findings conclusion and

47:10 ↗ recommendation

47:12 ↗ and

47:13 ↗ so from here

47:16 ↗ uh this concludes staff's presentation

47:19 ↗ it's now time for the city council to

47:21 ↗ deliberate

47:22 ↗ and make a decision on the applications

47:24 ↗ based on the project record created by

47:26 ↗ the development commission

47:29 ↗ as presented in the agenda bill

47:31 ↗ council's options are to approve with

47:33 ↗ conditions as recommended by the

47:35 ↗ development commission

47:37 ↗ approve with revised or additional

47:40 ↗ conditions

47:41 ↗ remand one or more of the applications

47:44 ↗ to the development commission for

47:46 ↗ further consideration or deny one or

47:48 ↗ more of the applications

47:51 ↗ again the decision once made is

47:53 ↗ appealable to king county superior court

47:57 ↗ and with that i'll take any questions

47:59 ↗ you've got

48:01 ↗ thank you christina

48:03 ↗ looking to see if there are any council

48:04 ↗ questions

48:10 ↗ so at this time i will open up the floor

48:13 ↗ for council deliberations and because

48:15 ↗ the city council is making a

48:16 ↗ quasi-judicial decision pursuant to rcw

48:20 ↗ 42.30.140 parent ii the open public

48:23 ↗ meetings act does not apply if a council

48:26 ↗ member wishes to convene into closed

48:27 ↗ session for a portion of the meeting

48:29 ↗ please make a verbal request and we will

48:31 ↗ take a brief recess to adjust the room

48:36 ↗ okay

48:38 ↗ if council is ready to make a decision

48:39 ↗ then a council member needs to move to

48:41 ↗ approve the proposed resolution

48:48 ↗ council president

48:51 ↗ thank you

48:54 ↗ i moved to approve resolution number

48:57 ↗ 2022-09

49:00 ↗ approving a master site plan site

49:02 ↗ development permit and administrative

49:04 ↗ adjustments of standards for the issue

49:06 ↗ school district providence heights high

49:08 ↗ school an elementary school campus

49:10 ↗ project with conditions and adopting

49:13 ↗ findings of fact and conclusions

49:16 ↗ is there a second

49:18 ↗ deputy council president uh thank you

49:20 ↗ i'll second that motion it has been

49:22 ↗ moved and seconded uh to approve a

49:24 ↗ master site plan

49:26 ↗ is there any council discussion

49:32 ↗ council president

49:34 ↗ thank you

49:36 ↗ um i'm sure we will have further

49:37 ↗ discussion but i wanted to start out by

49:41 ↗ just recognizing

49:43 ↗ how difficult of a situation this is

49:46 ↗ within a community

49:50 ↗ with all kinds of needs and all kinds of

49:54 ↗ preferences but at this point we are

49:57 ↗ reviewing the development commission's

49:59 ↗ closed record we are

50:02 ↗ using the information found in that

50:04 ↗ record and within the meetings which

50:07 ↗ included all of the public comment

50:10 ↗ to

50:11 ↗ deliberate and make our decisions so i

50:14 ↗ just

50:15 ↗ really wanted to recognize that within

50:17 ↗ that record there is exhaustive

50:20 ↗ detail around the important elements of

50:23 ↗ this project

50:25 ↗ that includes

50:26 ↗ the

50:27 ↗ environmentally critical areas lighting

50:31 ↗ noise control storm water management and

50:34 ↗ much much more i also want to recognize

50:37 ↗ the

50:38 ↗ intense coordination between the city of

50:41 ↗ issaquah and city of sammamish regarding

50:44 ↗ the

50:46 ↗ entrance on 228th for this proposed

50:49 ↗ project

50:51 ↗ and the southeast 43rd right-of-way

50:53 ↗ improvements

50:56 ↗ this property lies within the city of

50:59 ↗ issaquah but the right-of-way is within

51:01 ↗ the city of sammamish which brings into

51:04 ↗ account quite a

51:06 ↗ different set of um review criteria um

51:10 ↗ and information than we have received in

51:12 ↗ the past so i guess i just wanted to

51:15 ↗ start out recognizing how much intense

51:18 ↗ information there is within this record

51:22 ↗ on all of those very important pieces

51:24 ↗ which we will then use to deliberate i

51:27 ↗ could go further but i believe

51:30 ↗ i'd like to hear from

51:31 ↗ my colleagues and see what kind of

51:34 ↗ commentary we have around now that there

51:36 ↗ is a motion on the table

51:39 ↗ thank you council president

51:42 ↗ council member martz

51:44 ↗ i will dive into the deep end of the

51:45 ↗ pool

51:46 ↗ and first i want to thank the

51:48 ↗ development commission for a colossal

51:51 ↗ amount of work

51:53 ↗ it shows in the detail

51:57 ↗ of the findings here i'm particularly

52:00 ↗ struck

52:01 ↗ by i mean i've seen conditions of

52:04 ↗ approval that have come out of dc

52:06 ↗ reports before these are a very

52:09 ↗ thoughtful and articulate set of

52:12 ↗ conditions under which to allow for the

52:16 ↗ oh uh the the um

52:19 ↗ uh alternative i'm glad i'm blanking on

52:22 ↗ the i'm plucking on the word but um the

52:24 ↗ the the very variance variations no

52:26 ↗ that's not the right word anyhow the

52:28 ↗ conditions are very strong and

52:31 ↗ i think will be

52:34 ↗ if this is approved

52:36 ↗ this evening will be an important part

52:38 ↗ of making sure that uh

52:41 ↗ this meets city of issaquah standards i

52:43 ↗ was struck

52:45 ↗ by

52:47 ↗ the

52:48 ↗ relative

52:49 ↗ good nature of the dc at the end of that

52:51 ↗ march 3rd meeting and the fact that they

52:54 ↗ all seem to be

52:56 ↗ still bright-eyed and bushy-tailed after

52:58 ↗ a long process

53:00 ↗ and the fact that they that this was not

53:04 ↗ um in the end a particularly acrimonious

53:07 ↗ process is very important to me because

53:09 ↗ it speaks to the solidity of the

53:13 ↗ uh of the of their recommendation you

53:16 ↗ know we have also had just like we've

53:18 ↗ had

53:18 ↗ um

53:19 ↗ conditions of approval in the past that

53:22 ↗ that weren't this um fully formed you

53:25 ↗ know we've had things come out of dc

53:28 ↗ you know with less unanimity and less

53:31 ↗ confidence and the fact that they that

53:33 ↗ they come out after the 6 600 pages of

53:36 ↗ material

53:38 ↗ as i said bright-eyed and bushy-tailed

53:40 ↗ and unanimous in their support is

53:42 ↗ extremely important to me

53:45 ↗ so

53:46 ↗ i thought i would offer that up

53:49 ↗ thank you councilmember martz

53:53 ↗ other comments our discussion council

53:55 ↗ member ray i will jump into the pool too

53:58 ↗ um

54:01 ↗ i want to recognize what council

54:02 ↗ president walsh said that this has been

54:04 ↗ a difficult decision and matter all

54:07 ↗ along when you have competing community

54:09 ↗ needs it is very hard to come down with

54:12 ↗ something that makes sense and so i'm

54:15 ↗ i'm very um

54:17 ↗ gratified by the work that the

54:20 ↗ development commission did and i'm also

54:24 ↗ was impressed with the community's input

54:27 ↗ what um what

54:29 ↗ gives me some

54:32 ↗ i don't know it's solace or joy is

54:34 ↗ that the conditions that were identified

54:36 ↗ were a way to strike a balance between

54:38 ↗ what

54:39 ↗ is uh what was possible and what

54:43 ↗ met the needs of the community so i

54:45 ↗ think that there was a lot of good work

54:47 ↗ done to make conditions on this that

54:50 ↗ tried to ease the impact and

54:53 ↗ honestly i when i started reading the

54:55 ↗ record i was very intrigued with the

54:57 ↗ adjustments of administrative

54:59 ↗ adjustments of standards because i think

55:00 ↗ that those are always a little bit

55:02 ↗ challenging and i thought that the the

55:04 ↗ rationale

55:06 ↗ for them

55:07 ↗ was

55:08 ↗ was right on

55:10 ↗ um

55:10 ↗ i mean it's a difficult thing i mean

55:12 ↗ we're bound by the record and we're

55:13 ↗ bound by the law

55:15 ↗ and so we'll make a decision based on on

55:18 ↗ those factors so

55:20 ↗ but mostly thank you to the development

55:22 ↗ commission the public in in helping us

55:24 ↗ to move this forward and hopefully the

55:26 ↗ best way possible

55:28 ↗ thank you councilmember ray other

55:30 ↗ council members

55:32 ↗ deputy council president hall

55:34 ↗ uh thank you very much

55:36 ↗ um

55:37 ↗ i uh also just want to begin uh start by

55:40 ↗ acknowledging uh community participation

55:42 ↗ ending participation and engagement in

55:43 ↗ this process

55:44 ↗ there um was an incredible amount of

55:47 ↗ thoughtful

55:48 ↗ comments and relevant feedback from the

55:50 ↗ community as part of this record

55:52 ↗ and i want to thank everyone who

55:53 ↗ contributed to that record

55:55 ↗ some of whom

55:56 ↗ clearly having reviewed the record

55:58 ↗ clearly spent many many hours

56:01 ↗ ensuring that their voice was heard and

56:03 ↗ it most certainly was

56:05 ↗ so um thank you very much for your

56:06 ↗ passion

56:07 ↗ and your participation in the process

56:10 ↗ i'll be i'll be brief after having

56:12 ↗ reviewed the record

56:14 ↗ based upon

56:15 ↗ the criteria that we consider for master

56:17 ↗ site plan approval

56:19 ↗ um alignment with city code in the

56:21 ↗ comprehensive plan

56:22 ↗ the thoughtful consideration and

56:24 ↗ conditions of the development commission

56:27 ↗ the responsiveness and the commitments

56:29 ↗ of the applicant and the hard work of

56:31 ↗ the hard work of staff thank you really

56:33 ↗ thank you staff

56:35 ↗ um

56:36 ↗ to ensure that all these things are

56:37 ↗ happening i'm satisfied with where we're

56:39 ↗ at and i'll be supporting the motion

56:41 ↗ tonight

56:42 ↗ i am eager to hear from the rest of the

56:43 ↗ council members and be open if there are

56:45 ↗ any um

56:46 ↗ potential changes that council members

56:48 ↗ would like to bring forward i'm open to

56:50 ↗ hearing that thank you very much

56:52 ↗ thanks uh additional comments

56:56 ↗ um uh council member hunt

57:01 ↗ thank you i

57:02 ↗ have some similar comments to my fellow

57:05 ↗ council members as far as i wanted to

57:07 ↗ take a minute to thank all of the

57:09 ↗ community members who have participated

57:11 ↗ in this process

57:12 ↗ we are

57:14 ↗ at this point bound by the record and in

57:16 ↗ the record there is a lot of

57:18 ↗ very thoughtful very

57:20 ↗ um very passionate feedback and

57:24 ↗ as the decision maker i did

57:26 ↗ read that feedback and take that into

57:28 ↗ account with my decision making we do

57:30 ↗ have very clear criteria at this point

57:32 ↗ which we are

57:33 ↗ um

57:35 ↗ bound by law as was mentioned earlier to

57:37 ↗ use as the criteria for the decision

57:39 ↗ making so

57:40 ↗ um i i just wanted to make sure that i

57:43 ↗ acknowledged however that there is a lot

57:45 ↗ of information here and a lot of thought

57:48 ↗ went into it and um it did guide the

57:50 ↗ process

57:52 ↗ of the of this project

57:54 ↗ um so i wanted to thank the development

57:56 ↗ commission for their thoughtful

57:58 ↗ deliberation i wanted to thank the staff

58:00 ↗ for making it clear why there were um

58:02 ↗ why the decisions were being made the

58:04 ↗ way they were being made and um

58:06 ↗ thank again the community i do have a

58:09 ↗ proposed um new condition if i might

58:12 ↗ make that now um so i would

58:15 ↗ council member can i get some general

58:17 ↗ comments um from the other two who i

58:19 ↗ think there's only two left they have in

58:20 ↗ common and they'll come right back to

58:21 ↗ you yes thank you councilmember

58:24 ↗ uh michelle

58:28 ↗ thank you i'll be very brief because

58:31 ↗ i don't want to repeat what my fellow

58:32 ↗ council members have said

58:34 ↗ i was so impressed watching the

58:36 ↗ development commission and

58:38 ↗ the uh huge amount of work that they

58:40 ↗ accomplished the thoughtfulness with

58:42 ↗ which they did that as others have

58:44 ↗ mentioned the

58:46 ↗ you know no rancor

58:48 ↗ um just uh very amicable discussions and

58:52 ↗ um very thorough and very

58:55 ↗ clear how they reach their decisions so

58:57 ↗ just all praise to them and to chair

58:59 ↗ brennan i thought he did a magnificent

59:01 ↗ job sharing

59:03 ↗ what was a very difficult discussion

59:05 ↗ overall

59:07 ↗ [Music]

59:08 ↗ as has also been stated we are bound by

59:11 ↗ the record and by the criteria and by

59:14 ↗ the code that is in place

59:16 ↗ and having reviewed

59:18 ↗ all of that and the recommendation that

59:20 ↗ came to us from the development

59:22 ↗ commission

59:24 ↗ without prolonging it i would just say

59:26 ↗ that i will support this motion as well

59:28 ↗ tonight

59:30 ↗ but um i just i just want to say again

59:33 ↗ how

59:35 ↗ neatly and clearly everything was laid

59:36 ↗ out which is amazing when you think of

59:38 ↗ the amount of material that was here

59:40 ↗ so thank you

59:42 ↗ councilmember joe

59:44 ↗ thank you mayor

59:47 ↗ esquad's a special place where people

59:49 ↗ care his is

59:51 ↗ our motto

59:52 ↗ and uh i i look across the country and i

59:56 ↗ see

59:57 ↗ um people disagreeing and being

59:59 ↗ disagreeable at school board meetings

1:00:02 ↗ and council meetings and and

1:00:04 ↗ i just wish that they would watch

1:00:08 ↗ 30 minutes of any of the three meetings

1:00:10 ↗ that you had

1:00:11 ↗ with the development commission with the

1:00:13 ↗ public just

1:00:15 ↗ we disagreed

1:00:16 ↗ on certain topics we aired those

1:00:18 ↗ disagreements but we were not

1:00:20 ↗ disagreeable and i think that says quite

1:00:22 ↗ a bit about

1:00:23 ↗ our city

1:00:25 ↗ and the civil discourse that we have in

1:00:26 ↗ this city and i would like to hold it up

1:00:28 ↗ as a model to the rest of the country

1:00:31 ↗ when we're seeing so much discord out

1:00:34 ↗ there

1:00:35 ↗ as many of you know i'm an attorney by

1:00:37 ↗ background

1:00:38 ↗ spent 12 years in private practice and

1:00:40 ↗ and was

1:00:43 ↗ the municipal court pro tem judge for a

1:00:45 ↗ time here and so i'm very aware of

1:00:48 ↗ flying the law and understanding the

1:00:50 ↗ parameters that i'm restricted to

1:00:53 ↗ during this process and so

1:00:55 ↗ after reviewing everything i i in

1:00:57 ↗ general agree with most my other

1:00:59 ↗ colleagues that this is a well-run

1:01:01 ↗ process

1:01:02 ↗ within the parameters that we were

1:01:04 ↗ allowed to review

1:01:06 ↗ the conditions are probably the best we

1:01:08 ↗ can reach given the layout of the

1:01:11 ↗ geography there and the other

1:01:13 ↗ challenging conditions

1:01:14 ↗ and so i

1:01:16 ↗ look forward to

1:01:17 ↗ a robust discussion about any other

1:01:19 ↗ changes that might be made

1:01:21 ↗ tonight and i'll continue to keep an

1:01:22 ↗ open mind thank you

1:01:26 ↗ councilmember hunt

1:01:29 ↗ thank you

1:01:30 ↗ i would move to

1:01:32 ↗ add one new condition which would be

1:01:35 ↗ condition 58

1:01:36 ↗ and this condition would read as follows

1:01:38 ↗ the applicant is strongly encouraged to

1:01:40 ↗ use materials for artificial turf fields

1:01:42 ↗ that comply with best available science

1:01:44 ↗ regarding detrimental effects on salmon

1:01:47 ↗ habitat to protect environmental quality

1:01:49 ↗ and to avoid materials containing six

1:01:51 ↗ ppd queen known

1:01:54 ↗ for a second

1:01:56 ↗ second russell thanks it's been moved

1:01:58 ↗ and seconded discussion on the uh

1:02:01 ↗ additional condition

1:02:02 ↗ uh council president okay i'm gonna go

1:02:04 ↗ to council member hand and then council

1:02:05 ↗ president all right thank you

1:02:08 ↗ um one of the master site plan approval

1:02:10 ↗ criteria is consistency with our

1:02:12 ↗ comprehensive plan and one of our

1:02:14 ↗ policies within the comprehensive plan

1:02:16 ↗ which is referred to in the record is

1:02:18 ↗ policy luh2 which is to maintain

1:02:21 ↗ development regulations that promote

1:02:23 ↗ compatibility between uses retain

1:02:25 ↗ desired neighborhood character ensure

1:02:26 ↗ adequate light air and open space

1:02:28 ↗ protect and improve environmental

1:02:30 ↗ quality and manage potential impacts on

1:02:32 ↗ public facilities and services by

1:02:34 ↗ addressing features such as pervious

1:02:36 ↗ service ratios and the um and the policy

1:02:39 ↗ goes on

1:02:40 ↗ so the relevant part i believe of this

1:02:42 ↗ policy is the protect and improve

1:02:44 ↗ environmental quality there is a lot of

1:02:47 ↗ information in the record about the

1:02:49 ↗ potential

1:02:51 ↗ environmental impacts of

1:02:53 ↗ this

1:02:54 ↗ project and within the record as well

1:02:56 ↗ there is information about the best

1:02:58 ↗ available science regarding recent

1:03:00 ↗ studies on detrimental effects on salmon

1:03:03 ↗ habitat specifically from

1:03:05 ↗ 6ppd quinone and then also tying that

1:03:08 ↗ back to potential materials that might

1:03:09 ↗ be used on turf fields of which there

1:03:11 ↗ are several proposed

1:03:13 ↗ in the project

1:03:14 ↗ so

1:03:15 ↗ i wanted to

1:03:18 ↗ add this condition that the applicant

1:03:20 ↗ would be strongly encouraged to use

1:03:22 ↗ materials that would

1:03:24 ↗ not

1:03:25 ↗ be detrimental to salmon habitat there's

1:03:27 ↗ also extensive information in the record

1:03:29 ↗ about concern about kokanee salmon

1:03:31 ↗ habitat and kokanee is

1:03:34 ↗ as is evident from the record very

1:03:36 ↗ important to the community and

1:03:39 ↗ they

1:03:40 ↗ it would

1:03:41 ↗ i would urge

1:03:42 ↗ the applicants to please consider that

1:03:44 ↗ in

1:03:45 ↗ their development of this specific

1:03:48 ↗ part of the proposal i also wanted to

1:03:51 ↗ quote from

1:03:52 ↗ one of the

1:03:54 ↗ materials in our packet which is the um

1:03:58 ↗ a project memo subjects laughing jacobs

1:04:00 ↗ creek project discharge in which it

1:04:03 ↗ says um two things that i wanted to

1:04:05 ↗ quote one is that as a result of the

1:04:06 ↗ storm water system the water leaving the

1:04:08 ↗ site will be cleaner than the runoff

1:04:10 ↗ leaving the site in current conditions

1:04:12 ↗ and the runoff leaving the project site

1:04:13 ↗ will be reduced from both the previous

1:04:15 ↗ development runoff rates and the

1:04:16 ↗ existing disturbed area runoff as

1:04:18 ↗ required by the stormwater manual based

1:04:20 ↗ on the above information the project

1:04:21 ↗ will have no adverse impacts to laughing

1:04:23 ↗ jacob's creek and no additional

1:04:24 ↗ mitigation of stormwater is proposed by

1:04:26 ↗ this project

1:04:27 ↗ so

1:04:28 ↗ um to conclude i believe that to

1:04:31 ↗ actually adhere to this part of our

1:04:33 ↗ comprehensive plan in which we maintain

1:04:35 ↗ that um the project would that the

1:04:38 ↗ development regulations would protect

1:04:40 ↗ and improve environmental quality to

1:04:42 ↗ maintain that and also to

1:04:44 ↗ um

1:04:46 ↗ to have these no adverse

1:04:48 ↗ impacts as it says the project would

1:04:50 ↗ have on laughing jacobs creek which is

1:04:52 ↗ habitat for kokanee i believe that this

1:04:54 ↗ condition is important to add in

1:04:58 ↗ additional discussion council president

1:05:00 ↗ thank you um

1:05:02 ↗ i appreciate that this is brought up

1:05:05 ↗ and that we are

1:05:06 ↗ able to have a conversation about

1:05:09 ↗ because this was brought up in the

1:05:11 ↗ record and it was a concern of community

1:05:13 ↗ members there was a portion of the staff

1:05:16 ↗ report

1:05:17 ↗ and

1:05:17 ↗ the concern of laughing jacob creek and

1:05:21 ↗ how that flows to lake sammamish

1:05:25 ↗ i would ask staff

1:05:29 ↗ how

1:05:32 ↗ how a condition that

1:05:34 ↗ says strongly encouraged to use

1:05:37 ↗ materials how that

1:05:41 ↗ comes into effect and whether because

1:05:43 ↗ obviously these are related to whether

1:05:46 ↗ or not something can get approval

1:05:48 ↗ and so i wonder is that

1:05:51 ↗ language

1:05:53 ↗ appropriate or is there any adjustment

1:05:56 ↗ there that we would

1:05:57 ↗ need to make

1:06:00 ↗ if it's okay may i make a comment

1:06:02 ↗ it's very typical to do what victoria

1:06:04 ↗ has just done as a development

1:06:06 ↗ commission member but it is quite

1:06:08 ↗ unenforceable

1:06:09 ↗ so if the council wanted to add 19 of

1:06:11 ↗ these to get a better product you could

1:06:14 ↗ they don't have to do any of them

1:06:18 ↗ so toward that idea many of the other

1:06:21 ↗ um

1:06:23 ↗ additional

1:06:24 ↗ conditions are enforceable and so

1:06:28 ↗ is

1:06:29 ↗ i wonder if there is a way to

1:06:33 ↗ make an adjustment of that

1:06:35 ↗ toward an enforceable nature because i

1:06:37 ↗ think it's a

1:06:38 ↗ creative potential solution

1:06:41 ↗ to

1:06:44 ↗ one problem that was presented in the

1:06:46 ↗ materials but just like with the

1:06:49 ↗ development commission when they were

1:06:50 ↗ talking through potential conditions the

1:06:53 ↗ understanding is how do you make

1:06:55 ↗ something that is the most effective

1:06:58 ↗ toward the idea trying to be created so

1:07:01 ↗ i wonder if there's anything that we

1:07:03 ↗ would hear from staff on potential

1:07:05 ↗ conditions or language

1:07:09 ↗ good evening

1:07:11 ↗ i did look through the code and did

1:07:14 ↗ discuss this with staff and there's

1:07:16 ↗ nothing in the current code that would

1:07:18 ↗ allow the city to

1:07:19 ↗ include enforceable language the most

1:07:21 ↗ the city could do here is encourage

1:07:24 ↗ it

1:07:31 ↗ it doesn't mean you shouldn't

1:07:34 ↗ it just means you may not get it

1:07:36 ↗ councilmember hunt

1:07:38 ↗ well thank you i'm i'm interested to

1:07:41 ↗ hear what my fellow council members

1:07:42 ↗ think um i will say that i did confer

1:07:45 ↗ with city staff including the city

1:07:47 ↗ attorney on this and um

1:07:50 ↗ and so this language i recognize it says

1:07:53 ↗ strongly encourage

1:07:55 ↗ and

1:07:56 ↗ it's a very important topic so my

1:07:59 ↗ preference would be that this is this is

1:08:02 ↗ what we

1:08:03 ↗ can do to raise the issue

1:08:05 ↗ and let it be known to the applicant

1:08:07 ↗ that this is

1:08:08 ↗ strongly encouraged by the city because

1:08:09 ↗ this is best available science the other

1:08:12 ↗ point i would make is that this is

1:08:13 ↗ relatively this is established science

1:08:15 ↗ but it is

1:08:17 ↗ relatively recent and code sometimes

1:08:20 ↗ lags best available science and that

1:08:22 ↗ doesn't mean that we shouldn't bring

1:08:24 ↗ that to the attention of and

1:08:26 ↗ call out the importance of

1:08:28 ↗ of

1:08:29 ↗ best available science to the applicant

1:08:31 ↗ so my preference is to include it i

1:08:33 ↗ recognize

1:08:36 ↗ the concern about enforceability

1:08:40 ↗ councilmember joe

1:08:42 ↗ thank you

1:08:43 ↗ um

1:08:45 ↗ i think it's important that

1:08:47 ↗ this language

1:08:48 ↗ be included

1:08:50 ↗ while it's not enforceable certainly uh

1:08:53 ↗ staff and

1:08:54 ↗ council members are going to be having

1:08:56 ↗ conversations with

1:08:57 ↗ school board members and the

1:08:58 ↗ superintendent talking about the project

1:09:00 ↗ as it goes forward as is pointed out in

1:09:03 ↗ the record as

1:09:04 ↗ the permits for each of the steps in

1:09:06 ↗ this process go forward

1:09:09 ↗ the uh the planning department and staff

1:09:11 ↗ have an opportunity to to

1:09:14 ↗ give comment and and mold how the campus

1:09:17 ↗ gets put together and having this

1:09:20 ↗ language in there while not enforceable

1:09:22 ↗ certainly brings that conversation to

1:09:23 ↗ the fore when we're talking about the

1:09:26 ↗ fields and i think it's important to

1:09:27 ↗ send a message from the council to

1:09:30 ↗ the school district and to our staff

1:09:31 ↗ that we want to try to do a best best

1:09:33 ↗ available science and

1:09:35 ↗ stay as current as we can to protect our

1:09:38 ↗ natural resources and just on a personal

1:09:41 ↗ i would want to thank councilmember hunt

1:09:44 ↗ for her service on ryra eight

1:09:47 ↗ and the dedication that she shows to

1:09:49 ↗ this issue i appreciate her bringing the

1:09:51 ↗ best science to this discussion thank

1:09:53 ↗ you

1:09:56 ↗ anybody else making a comment before we

1:09:58 ↗ go to the vote

1:10:00 ↗ i will re-read the amendment

1:10:03 ↗ it is to add a condition 58 the

1:10:06 ↗ applicant is strongly encouraged to use

1:10:08 ↗ materials for artificial turf fields

1:10:10 ↗ that comply with best available science

1:10:12 ↗ regarding detrimental effects on salmon

1:10:14 ↗ habitat to protect environmental quality

1:10:17 ↗ and to avoid materials containing six pp

1:10:20 ↗ ppd quinoa quinoa

1:10:24 ↗ any other discussion

1:10:25 ↗ follow us in favor say aye

1:10:31 ↗ oppose

1:10:33 ↗ that carries unanimously council member

1:10:35 ↗ hunt

1:10:37 ↗ thank you madam mayor i have one

1:10:39 ↗ additional

1:10:41 ↗ motion to make regarding a modification

1:10:44 ↗ of a condition this would modify

1:10:46 ↗ condition 45

1:10:48 ↗ and add some words

1:10:50 ↗ to that condition and i have shared this

1:10:53 ↗ so um

1:10:55 ↗ i will read with the modifications

1:10:58 ↗ turbid runoff is not allowed to

1:10:59 ↗ discharge to the providence point

1:11:01 ↗ private detention system during and

1:11:03 ↗ following construction

1:11:05 ↗ um and then the condition goes on and

1:11:07 ↗ then in the

1:11:09 ↗ in a different part or other best

1:11:11 ↗ management practices on site during

1:11:12 ↗ construction and following construction

1:11:14 ↗ for any time prior to completion of the

1:11:17 ↗ permanent stormwater system

1:11:20 ↗ is there a second

1:11:23 ↗ council member demichelle second

1:11:25 ↗ and council member hunt would you like

1:11:27 ↗ to speak to this one

1:11:29 ↗ thank you

1:11:30 ↗ um

1:11:31 ↗ similar to my rationale on the first

1:11:35 ↗ motion

1:11:37 ↗ we have comprehensive plan policy which

1:11:40 ↗ is one of our criteria

1:11:42 ↗ comprehensive plan consistency is one of

1:11:43 ↗ our criteria for approval

1:11:45 ↗ and i do believe that

1:11:47 ↗ this helps to

1:11:50 ↗ also

1:11:51 ↗ strengthen and make it clear that um the

1:11:55 ↗ turbid runoff is not allowed to

1:11:56 ↗ discharge to the private providence

1:11:58 ↗ point private detention system not just

1:12:01 ↗ during the period of construction um

1:12:03 ↗ that's that's the point of this as i

1:12:05 ↗ understand it this is consistent with

1:12:08 ↗ the

1:12:09 ↗ city code so we do have a basis in code

1:12:12 ↗ for

1:12:14 ↗ um

1:12:14 ↗ for this which is imc 13.28.025.8.26

1:12:20 ↗ so

1:12:22 ↗ we have a basis in code for making this

1:12:24 ↗ change and it clarifies that

1:12:27 ↗ even if construction stops

1:12:29 ↗ you cannot discharge that turbid water

1:12:31 ↗ into the provenance point detention

1:12:33 ↗ system

1:12:34 ↗ so i wanted to make that clarification

1:12:37 ↗ also because there seems to be some

1:12:40 ↗ um

1:12:41 ↗ there are some variables that are not

1:12:42 ↗ yet decided as far as some of the

1:12:44 ↗ phasing of the construction and so i

1:12:46 ↗ thought construction might potentially

1:12:49 ↗ start and stop and wanted to make sure

1:12:50 ↗ that it was clear at no point until the

1:12:53 ↗ permanent system is there would you be

1:12:54 ↗ allowed to um to do this

1:12:57 ↗ that's great thank you

1:12:58 ↗ any other comments before we go for the

1:13:00 ↗ vote

1:13:03 ↗ okay oh deputy council president uh just

1:13:06 ↗ real quick then um i think this makes a

1:13:08 ↗ lot of sense and thank you very much for

1:13:10 ↗ bringing forward this amendment i'm not

1:13:11 ↗ seeing any obvious reason why we would

1:13:14 ↗ why we wouldn't support this change so i

1:13:15 ↗ will be supporting it thanks thanks

1:13:18 ↗ so the amendment is to add modify

1:13:21 ↗ condition 45 to read turbid runoff is

1:13:23 ↗ not allowed to discharge the providence

1:13:25 ↗ point private detention system during

1:13:27 ↗ and following construction

1:13:29 ↗ or other best management practice on

1:13:31 ↗ site during construction and following

1:13:33 ↗ construction for any time prior to

1:13:35 ↗ completion of the permanent stormwater

1:13:36 ↗ system

1:13:38 ↗ all those

1:13:40 ↗ favors sorry mayor i just wanted to

1:13:42 ↗ clarify because in my version i have

1:13:45 ↗ this dot dot dot but there is another

1:13:48 ↗ part of that so i don't know if you oh

1:13:49 ↗ sorry

1:13:51 ↗ i'll i'll do that um okay

1:13:54 ↗ turbid runoff is not allowed to

1:13:55 ↗ discharge the providence point private

1:13:57 ↗ detention system during with the words

1:13:59 ↗ added and following

1:14:02 ↗ construction jumping to the end of that

1:14:04 ↗ section or other best management

1:14:06 ↗ practices on site during construction

1:14:08 ↗ with the following wording added and

1:14:10 ↗ following construction for any time

1:14:12 ↗ prior to completion of the permanent

1:14:13 ↗ stormwater system

1:14:16 ↗ okay all those in favor say aye

1:14:22 ↗ opposed

1:14:23 ↗ that carries unanimously 7-0 and is

1:14:26 ↗ there additional discussion or are we

1:14:27 ↗ ready for the vote on the main motion

1:14:29 ↗ mayor yes

1:14:31 ↗ i would like to point out that section

1:14:33 ↗ one of the resolution adopts the

1:14:36 ↗ development commission findings and

1:14:38 ↗ because these two conditions differ from

1:14:40 ↗ their finding in conclusions we'd

1:14:42 ↗ recommend uh amendment to just conform

1:14:45 ↗ the

1:14:46 ↗ section one of the resolution to

1:14:48 ↗ acknowledge the changes that were just

1:14:50 ↗ made to the condition so i'm going to

1:14:51 ↗ put a

1:14:52 ↗ proposed motion on screen to achieve

1:14:55 ↗ that

1:14:58 ↗ in just a moment here

1:15:22 ↗ thank you is someone interested in

1:15:24 ↗ making

1:15:28 ↗ uh the top of the

1:15:30 ↗ document on the screen

1:15:33 ↗ make a motion and mirror if i could

1:15:35 ↗ clarify uh real quickly so essentially

1:15:38 ↗ this would just be putting in the body

1:15:40 ↗ of the resolution it would be

1:15:41 ↗ recognizing the addition of these

1:15:43 ↗ conditions so it'd be saying that the

1:15:45 ↗ council is adopting the development

1:15:46 ↗ commission's findings with these

1:15:48 ↗ revisions and incorporating them into

1:15:50 ↗ the body of the resolution so it may

1:15:52 ↗ seem redundant but it's it's documenting

1:15:55 ↗ the action that was just taken tonight

1:15:57 ↗ formalizing that in the resolution

1:16:00 ↗ thank you

1:16:03 ↗ is there a motion

1:16:05 ↗ thank you believe there already was a

1:16:07 ↗ motion do i need to restate that

1:16:12 ↗ a per usual process if a a council

1:16:15 ↗ member wouldn't mind um formally

1:16:19 ↗ readings

1:16:20 ↗ fantastic i can do that

1:16:22 ↗ um

1:16:25 ↗ i move to amend section one of the draft

1:16:28 ↗ resolution to adopt the development

1:16:30 ↗ commission's findings conclusions and

1:16:32 ↗ recommendations set forth in exhibit a

1:16:34 ↗ attached here too and incorporated here

1:16:36 ↗ in by this reference with the following

1:16:39 ↗ revisions there too

1:16:40 ↗ conditions of approval number 45 is

1:16:43 ↗ revised to read

1:16:45 ↗ turbid runoff is not allowed to

1:16:47 ↗ discharge to the providence point

1:16:49 ↗ private detention system during adding

1:16:52 ↗ and following

1:16:53 ↗ construction

1:16:54 ↗ to protect the downstream private system

1:16:56 ↗ this project must provide a temporary

1:16:58 ↗ bypass to root route runoff to a

1:17:01 ↗ temporary surface water containment

1:17:03 ↗ system like tesc pond baker tank etc or

1:17:08 ↗ other best management practice on-site

1:17:11 ↗ during the construction adding and

1:17:13 ↗ following construction for any time

1:17:15 ↗ prior to completion of the permanent

1:17:17 ↗ stormwater system the best management

1:17:19 ↗ practice shall be reviewed and approved

1:17:22 ↗ during site work one permit

1:17:25 ↗ an additional condition of approval

1:17:26 ↗ number 58 is added to read

1:17:29 ↗ the applicant is strongly encouraged to

1:17:31 ↗ use materials for artificial turf fields

1:17:33 ↗ that comply with the best available

1:17:35 ↗ science regarding detrimental effects on

1:17:37 ↗ salmon habitat to protect environmental

1:17:40 ↗ quality and to avoid materials

1:17:42 ↗ containing six ppd quinone

1:17:45 ↗ so second deputy council president

1:17:48 ↗ second

1:17:49 ↗ it's been moved and seconded is there

1:17:51 ↗ any discussion

1:17:52 ↗ this is a bit administrative

1:17:55 ↗ okay all in favor of this last amendment

1:17:58 ↗ please say

1:17:59 ↗ hi

1:18:00 ↗ all opposed

1:18:02 ↗ the amendment carries thank you city

1:18:04 ↗ clerk

1:18:04 ↗ any discussion before we vote on the

1:18:06 ↗ main motion

1:18:11 ↗ okay

1:18:12 ↗ the motion to approve resolution number

1:18:15 ↗ 2022-09 approving a master site plan

1:18:18 ↗ site development permit and

1:18:19 ↗ administrative adjustment of standards

1:18:20 ↗ for the esque school district providence

1:18:22 ↗ height high school and elementary school

1:18:24 ↗ campus project with conditions and

1:18:26 ↗ adopting findings of fact and

1:18:27 ↗ conclusions has been moved and seconded

1:18:30 ↗ uh all those in favor say aye

1:18:33 ↗ aye

1:18:35 ↗ opposed

1:18:37 ↗ that passes unanimously

1:18:39 ↗ 7-0

1:18:41 ↗ i have checked in with our legal counsel

1:18:44 ↗ to see about having an opportunity to

1:18:47 ↗ share a few thoughts with you as i'm not

1:18:48 ↗ a voting member of

1:18:50 ↗ this particular decision yet have served

1:18:53 ↗ 20 years on the development commission

1:18:54 ↗ and worked on many school district

1:18:56 ↗ products i am not overjoyed tonight

1:18:59 ↗ i'm actually upset i feel like there is

1:19:02 ↗ a missed opportunity here the things

1:19:04 ↗ that went well is the staff work on this

1:19:06 ↗ was outstanding the development

1:19:08 ↗ commission work

1:19:09 ↗ big lift bigger lift than i ever did

1:19:11 ↗ they did a great job and what you did

1:19:14 ↗ tonight was what you could do which was

1:19:17 ↗ decide if it met the code but the code

1:19:19 ↗ to me is not a visionary or an

1:19:21 ↗ aspirational anything it's a code

1:19:24 ↗ there's a huge lost opportunity here i'm

1:19:27 ↗ upset that we never talked about

1:19:29 ↗ what this campus could do to bring our

1:19:31 ↗ youth forward into the 21st century with

1:19:33 ↗ something other than a stadium i heard

1:19:36 ↗ in the testimony that we were provided

1:19:38 ↗ for this somebody called having a

1:19:40 ↗ stadium at every school equity that's

1:19:43 ↗ not that's equal

1:19:45 ↗ equity is making sure that all of the

1:19:47 ↗ students in the school have

1:19:48 ↗ opportunities for what they want to do

1:19:50 ↗ and not just the sporting community that

1:19:52 ↗ was probably the biggest elephant in the

1:19:54 ↗ room for the community and the neighbors

1:19:57 ↗ never got touched and it's no fault of

1:19:59 ↗ the staff it's no fault of the council

1:20:02 ↗ this is the way the system works but we

1:20:04 ↗ should have been

1:20:06 ↗ able to look at something that was

1:20:08 ↗ amazing and imaginary and forward

1:20:11 ↗ thinking and we got a school from the

1:20:12 ↗ 1970s it just doesn't look or feel any

1:20:15 ↗ different i find that hugely

1:20:16 ↗ disappointing and i am not part of your

1:20:19 ↗ voting body but and i share all the

1:20:21 ↗ compliments you paid out tonight but

1:20:23 ↗ this is this to me was not

1:20:26 ↗ our best moment

1:20:27 ↗ not that we could have done it

1:20:28 ↗ differently but this is not our best

1:20:30 ↗ moment

1:20:32 ↗ what else for the end of the meeting

1:20:38 ↗ okay

1:20:40 ↗ there being no other business this

1:20:41 ↗ evening

1:20:42 ↗ the meeting is adjourned at 7 51.

1:21:04 ↗ 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)

Barbara de Michele

Zach Hall

Victoria Hunt

Russell Joe

Tola Marts

Chris Reh

Lindsey Walsh

Motions and votes (5)

Approve Resolution No. 2022-09, approving a Master Site Plan, Site Development Permit and Administrative Adjustments of Standards for the Issaquah School District Providence Heights High School and Elementary School Campus Project with conditions; and adopting findings of fact and conclusions.

Moved by WALSH · seconded by HALL

Add a new Condition of Approval, Condition #58, as follows: The Applicant is strongly encouraged to use materials for artificial turf fields that comply with best available science regarding detrimental effects on salmon habitat to protect environmental quality, and to avoid materials containing 6PP…

Moved by HUNT · seconded by JOE

Carried 7-0

In favor: Barbara de Michele, Zach Hall, Victoria Hunt, Russell Joe, Tola Marts, Chris Reh, Lindsey Walsh

Modify Condition of Approval #45 as follows: Turbid runoff is not allowed to discharge to the Providence Point private detention system during and following construction… or other best management practice on- site during construction and following construction for any time prior to completion of the…

Moved by HUNT · seconded by DE MICHELE

Carried 7-0

In favor: Barbara de Michele, Zach Hall, Victoria Hunt, Russell Joe, Tola Marts, Chris Reh, Lindsey Walsh

Amend Section 1 of the draft resolution to adopt the Development Commission’s Findings, Conclusions, and Recommendation set forth in Exhibit A, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference, with the following revisions thereto: Condition of Approval #45 is revised to read: Turbid runoff…

Moved by WALSH · seconded by HALL

Carried 7-0

In favor: Barbara de Michele, Zach Hall, Victoria Hunt, Russell Joe, Tola Marts, Chris Reh, Lindsey Walsh

Main motion as amended: Amend Section 1 of the draft resolution to adopt the Development Commission’s Findings, Conclusions, and Recommendation set forth in Exhibit A, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference, with the following revisions thereto: Condition of Approval #45 is revise…

Moved by (main motion as amended) · seconded by

Carried 7-0

In favor: Barbara de Michele, Zach Hall, Victoria Hunt, Russell Joe, Tola Marts, Chris Reh, Lindsey Walsh