Development Commission · Wednesday, March 2, 2016 · City Council Digest

1. CALL TO ORDER

Commission Membership

packet pp.3

Open packet at p.3 ↗

Staff report:

Contacts About Created in 1983, this commission reviews all land use actions Staff Liaison requiring a Level 3 review. The Commission further serves as an Christopher Wright, Project advisory board to the City Council on land use actions requiring Oversight Manager council approval (Level 5 review). Email

2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES

Minutes of February 3, 2016

packet pp.5–19

▶ Watch from 1:00 Open packet at p.5 ↗

Staff report:

CITY OF ISSAQUAH DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION MINUTES 2/3/16

3. AGENDA ITEMS

Clark Elementary and Gibson Ek High School

Amy Tarce, Senior Planner · packet pp.21–67

Open packet at p.21 ↗

Staff report:

CITY OF ISSAQUAH DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION

1659 segments .txt ↗

0:32 ↗ relative to the proposed project. It is intended to provide a means by which the

0:38 ↗ applicant, the staff, the development commission, and the public are able to work together in

0:43 ↗ a productive and creative manner. However, options and issues raised may not be all inclusive

0:48 ↗ and no guarantees on the project outcome are made at this stage, as of this

0:54 ↗ meeting. Okay? So, that said, the first order of business today will be

1:00 ↗ the approval of minutes from the February 3rd meeting. Are there any corrections, additions,

1:06 ↗ deletions desired? If not, is there -- Chair, we'll approve the minutes of the

1:12 ↗ February 3rd, 2016 development commission meeting. Is there a second? Second. Is there any

1:17 ↗ further discussion? In which case, all those in favor signify by saying aye. Aye.

1:24 ↗ Ayes. Motion carries unanimously and the minutes are approved. So Amy, do you want

1:30 ↗ to take it over from now? The order, by the way, the order of

1:36 ↗ the meeting tonight will be a presentation by the city staff. Then there will

1:42 ↗ be an opportunity for the applicant to make a presentation. And after which there

1:48 ↗ will be an opportunity for public comment. excuse me, when the public

1:53 ↗ comment period is over, the development commissioners will individually have the opportunity to ask questions,

1:59 ↗ seek clarification, perhaps even answer a question if somebody has one, something like that. And

2:05 ↗ so that's the sequence of what we're going to be doing this evening. Okay? Amy?

2:10 ↗ Thank you. Good evening. My name is Amy Tarrs and I'm the senior planner for

2:16 ↗ the City of Issaquah. So tonight I'm going to do a short presentation for the

2:22 ↗ Clark Elementary School and Gibson Eck High School development. So I'm going to

2:28 ↗ skip this. So just to give everybody a little background, because there's

2:33 ↗ a whole history of how a lot of the school districts projects

2:39 ↗ in the last two years are interlinked. Last year, we presented the

2:45 ↗ new middle school project to the Development Commission and the City Council.

2:51 ↗ And part of that whole redevelopment of the middle school actually involves

2:57 ↗ also the Clark, the Clark Elementary High School. So what you're seeing

3:02 ↗ here is a sequential mapping of how all the new projects are

3:08 ↗ going to happen. So the ones where you see where

3:14 ↗ you see the number one are the two facilities that are intended to

3:19 ↗ be open by September 2016. The one at the bottom near the high

3:25 ↗ school This is the high school over here. Let me see if my

3:31 ↗ OK here. So this is the new middle school and over here is the

3:37 ↗ Gibson Eck High School. So in a little bit in a little later I

3:43 ↗ will be talking about how the scope of work for both the Gibson High

3:49 ↗ School and the Clark Elementary School. So in September 2017, the new

3:55 ↗ Clark Elementary School is scheduled to open and

4:00 ↗ in September 2018, the rest of the fields for the middle

4:06 ↗ school will be available. So the construction of this Clark Elementary,

4:11 ↗ the new Clark Elementary School is important for the ability of

4:17 ↗ the school district to tear down and demolish all the existing

4:23 ↗ facilities at the current Clark Elementary School, which also includes the Tiger Mountain

4:28 ↗ High School. So in order for these fields to come on, the new

4:34 ↗ middle school or the new Clark Elementary School has to be built.

4:41 ↗ So one of the things that we talked about during the

4:47 ↗ middle school review is the traffic mitigation for the middle school

4:52 ↗ which involved basically the full build out traffic impact mitigation. And

4:58 ↗ as part of that, there were four intersections that are involved. And

5:04 ↗ one of them, the Front Clark and Newport Way, is actually the

5:10 ↗ main access to this site. So we have asked the school district

5:16 ↗ or the applicant to basically go back and reevaluate the traffic impacts.

5:22 ↗ as part of the middle school traffic impact analysis and to account

5:28 ↗ for the proposed scope of work for the current Clark and Gibson

5:33 ↗ Act high school proposal. So a little bit of just a quick

5:39 ↗ orientation of where this project is. It's in the Old Town sub

5:45 ↗ area of the city and on the right is a graphic that

5:50 ↗ shows all the adjacent land uses so the project is in the

5:56 ↗ center and around it are primarily single family residential on both the

6:01 ↗ west side and the south side i'm sorry the south side is

6:07 ↗ a multi-family residential development On the north is the Issaquah Community Center

6:13 ↗ and pool and just immediately southeast bordered by the second avenue

6:18 ↗ is the Issaquah High School and the new middle school. So

6:24 ↗ it's not very clearly shown here but the Rainier Trail wraps

6:30 ↗ around the area that is currently the high school.

6:36 ↗ So the proposal, the lot size basically is the same as it is

6:42 ↗ today. It's 11.35 acres. There are seven parcels which the school district is

6:48 ↗ proposing to consolidate for this new development. So they will be applying for

6:53 ↗ a lot line adjustment. Given that in the land use code it requires

6:59 ↗ that any project over three acres requires a level three

7:05 ↗ review. This project will be a level three site development

7:10 ↗ permit. So I'll just quickly summarize the proposal. For Clark

7:16 ↗ Elementary, the school district is proposing 31 classrooms with eight

7:21 ↗ additional classrooms for expansion and four portables. There will be

7:27 ↗ 664 students and 74 staff for the first few

7:33 ↗ years, plus enough facilities to accommodate another 160 students

7:38 ↗ and eight staff. And the future building will also

7:44 ↗ be a three-story classroom building. So below this

7:49 ↗ image shows you the view looking north from the interior

7:55 ↗ courtyard of the existing campus. The building to the left

8:01 ↗ is the future wing of the of the Clark Elementary

8:06 ↗ School. And this is an existing building. So for Gibson

8:12 ↗ High School, the proposal is for 11 classrooms with

8:18 ↗ to accommodate 250 students and 20 staff. And it's

8:23 ↗ primarily a remodel of another existing structure in the

8:28 ↗ campus and expansion by basically infilling the current courtyard

8:34 ↗ for a new common space. So existing conditions,

8:40 ↗ just again, a quick orientation. So what you're seeing here is the

8:46 ↗ existing campus and this is just a general idea of the existing

8:52 ↗ buildings. And In my staff report, I mentioned that there is a

8:57 ↗ wetland at the southeast corner and it's shown here as this patterned area here.

9:03 ↗ And then there's also some steep slopes primarily outside of the property along the

9:09 ↗ residential lots on the east side of the, I'm sorry, on the west side

9:15 ↗ of the property. of the campus. And then there's also some

9:20 ↗ other areas where other steep slopes occur. We have asked

9:26 ↗ the school district to provide a critical areas report first

9:32 ↗ for the wetlands to identify the buffer and also to

9:37 ↗ determine whether any of the steep slopes are actually regulated

9:43 ↗ steep slopes. meaning that they would require buffering. When

9:48 ↗ steep slopes are artificially created due to some construction, then

9:54 ↗ it's not considered regulated and they are not required to

10:00 ↗ provide the same type of buffers as a naturally occurring

10:05 ↗ steep slope. So the So as far as the proposal, they

10:11 ↗ are proposing to maintain the critical area buffers, which currently is shown. This

10:17 ↗ is just a general idea. We are waiting for their critical areas report

10:23 ↗ and mitigation plan in order to identify exactly the line of the buffer.

10:28 ↗ And this is basically just to delineate the area where the steep slopes

10:34 ↗ occur. So part of the proposal is to retain some of the

10:40 ↗ existing buildings. So this is the Gibson Act building and then these blue ones

10:46 ↗ are for the elementary school. and expanding the existing building. So

10:51 ↗ this is the area that I was mentioning earlier, the courtyard space for

10:57 ↗ Gibson Act that will eventually be covered and taken up by the Commons

11:03 ↗ and a new classroom wing for the elementary school. They are proposing to

11:09 ↗ retain the existing north parking lot and another small parking lot for Gibson

11:15 ↗ Act. and relocating the primary pickup drop off

11:21 ↗ for the Clark Elementary School to the interior of the

11:27 ↗ property and adding additional play fields and play sports areas,

11:32 ↗ areas for portables and also parking lots to serve all

11:38 ↗ those buildings. And so these just highlights the areas where

11:44 ↗ the portables are going. Um so I

11:49 ↗ yeah so the land use code requires that for

11:55 ↗ community facilities zones that uh the the the

12:01 ↗ The regulations that apply would be the most

12:06 ↗ restrictive adjacent zoning. So in this case, it's

12:12 ↗ the single family small lot. So this just

12:17 ↗ kind of highlights the different adjacent zoning for

12:23 ↗ the property. And so based on the development standards

12:28 ↗ for the single family small lot, Again, just to summarize, basically

12:34 ↗ I'm just going to highlight two items. For the impervious surface,

12:40 ↗ the maximum required is 50% or allowed. They are currently at

12:46 ↗ 64.83% based on the proposal. So they exceed the limit for

12:51 ↗ impervious. And then for height, they also exceed it by 50%.

12:58 ↗ Actually, I'm sorry, I didn't show the proposed height for the Clark Elementary, which is,

13:03 ↗ what's that, 60 feet? 50 feet to the roof and then 65 feet to the

13:09 ↗ top of mechanical equipment. Okay, so 50 feet and then 65 feet to the top

13:15 ↗ of the mechanical equipment. So a little bit of... context again. If

13:21 ↗ you recall for the middle school, we had the same

13:26 ↗ situation and the community facilities zone actually has a provision

13:32 ↗ where it allows for an expansion of a nonconforming condition. So in

13:38 ↗ this case, because they do have an existing building that exceeds the height limit,

13:44 ↗ then they are allowed to expand the building height up to the proposed 50

13:49 ↗ feet. As far as the impervious area, they currently do not exceed the impervious

13:55 ↗ area. So there are two options for the applicant. One is to apply for

14:01 ↗ a variance to be able to to build the campus according

14:07 ↗ to their proposal or to basically remove some of the impervious

14:13 ↗ areas to meet the 50%. Like for instance, as far as

14:19 ↗ with the portables, it could possibly be, the site for the

14:25 ↗ portables could possibly be replaced with more pervious areas.

14:31 ↗ So site access and circulation, I hope you can distinguish these two

14:37 ↗ colors. So for the pick up and drop off of the students,

14:43 ↗ since this is an elementary school, they are expecting a lot more

14:49 ↗ cars, parents picking up and dropping off the students. So there is

14:56 ↗ They are using their existing site access which is along Clark Street and following

15:01 ↗ the same route that currently the parents use to access the site but instead

15:07 ↗ currently the parents would usually just come here drop off the kids or pick

15:13 ↗ up their kids and then come back out. So the proposal is for the

15:19 ↗ new drop off to to go all the way in and the parents will follow

15:24 ↗ this route, go all the way south and then on the way north they could

15:28 ↗ drop off their children and then go back out. And once they're over here, they

15:33 ↗ have two choices. They could use the bus loop if the buses are not using

15:39 ↗ it or they can take this route which is the current route that

15:45 ↗ they would take to get then leave the site. For children who are

15:51 ↗ walking to school basically they will follow this light blue and the school

15:57 ↗ currently has the primary access here to the building and

16:02 ↗ this will still be open for the children to use

16:08 ↗ as well as this outside hallway or I guess, access

16:14 ↗ point between Gibson Act and the current middle school. So that will still

16:19 ↗ be open and available for the kids to access the site. For the

16:25 ↗ buses, they will continue to use the same bus loop and use the

16:31 ↗ same route. So what's not shown here is for Gibson Act,

16:36 ↗ basically for the first two years that the school is open, they're

16:42 ↗ not expecting the students to drive because they're transitioning into, you know,

16:48 ↗ from, you know, first and second year to the junior and

16:54 ↗ senior year. So, but eventually this will be the route for

17:00 ↗ the students to use and then to park. for staff they will be

17:06 ↗ able to still use this is again an existing driveway they will be able

17:12 ↗ to use that to park here so for the gibson act building what the

17:17 ↗ school district had requested is for us to to to treat this as a

17:23 ↗ building permit with no site work improvements currently proposed they will continue to use

17:29 ↗ this this existing parking lot here. Um and there are some minor um

17:35 ↗ uh ADA required changes to their to their uh walkway. So those are all

17:41 ↗ going to be temporary until we have an approved site plan for this whole

17:46 ↗ campus. So two things that we've asked from

17:52 ↗ the applicant is how to how to ensure that when with

17:58 ↗ the new drop off that there won't be this congestion and

18:03 ↗ and and the whole idea of or are concerned about the

18:09 ↗ students basically getting off the cars and crossing and not waiting until

18:15 ↗ they can come around, especially when it's a very congested time of

18:21 ↗ year. the day. And then the other question we had that we'd

18:27 ↗ like them to look into is how to address the fire department's concern

18:32 ↗ about having cars queuing up here and in times of emergency for the

18:38 ↗ emergency vehicles to be able to access this with all the cars.

18:45 ↗ So these are just some photos of the existing conditions. So this

18:51 ↗ is the bus loop currently with the entry to the middle school.

18:56 ↗ And at the bottom, the foreground is basically a part, you'll see

19:02 ↗ a part of the bus loop with a sidewalk that basically comes

19:08 ↗ around here. And then in the background is the parking lot that

19:13 ↗ currently exists. So these are existing conditions for

19:19 ↗ Clark and for First Avenue Southeast. First Avenue Southeast is the

19:25 ↗ street that leads to the bus loop and Southeast Clark is where they

19:31 ↗ access, where parents access to school. So again, you see a small walkway

19:37 ↗ or sidewalk here, but along First Avenue, basically what we see is what

19:43 ↗ looks like just a line to delineate where, you you know, I guess kids

19:48 ↗ can walk and this building to the right is the community, the city's community

19:54 ↗ center. So one of the things that we are asking them also is to

20:00 ↗ look at pedestrian access, safe pedestrian access, especially for the students along these two

20:06 ↗ streets. Another part of the site that

20:12 ↗ we will be continuing to look at is the area,

20:18 ↗ the existing driveway that's eventually going to be the primary

20:23 ↗ access to the pick-up and drop-off area. So currently it's

20:29 ↗ shown as a paved area with basically this is their property line at

20:35 ↗ the very edge. The narrowest point of this access is between the wall of

20:41 ↗ this building and their property line and it's about 20 feet. The rest of

20:46 ↗ the site, once you go and enter further south, you see that there's a

20:52 ↗ lot more space for them to use for the drop off and pick up

20:58 ↗ area. So all of these areas here will eventually be redeveloped.

21:04 ↗ So as far as parking, our initial analysis determined based on the

21:10 ↗ number of classrooms and faculty that they are proposing, 216 spaces are

21:16 ↗ required and they are proposing 242 plus 81 in the overflow area,

21:22 ↗ which is this yellow area. So as I mentioned earlier, there are

21:27 ↗ two existing parking spaces that they will retain. and they're shown

21:33 ↗ as blue here and these are in purple are all the new

21:39 ↗ parking areas so items that we'd like to bring back to the

21:45 ↗ development commission at our our public hearing would be the impervious area

21:51 ↗ compliance we'll we'll know by then what the school district would like

21:57 ↗ to which option Basically, if they determine that they would opt for

22:03 ↗ a variance, then instead of going to the development commission, they will be

22:09 ↗ going to the hearing examiner for their project approval. So we are also

22:15 ↗ going to take back, but assuming we're coming back to the development commission,

22:21 ↗ we're also going to have a more detailed presentation on the critical areas.

22:26 ↗ the traffic impact analysis, the transition and compatibility with adjacent residential

22:32 ↗ areas, architectural materials and color, and the tree preservation plan and

22:38 ↗ mitigation plan. So for tonight's discussion, we thought that there's four

22:44 ↗ items that we'd like to hear. for your review and comments.

22:50 ↗ That would be, as I discussed earlier, the vehicular access and

22:55 ↗ circulation, both the vehicular, I'm sorry, yes, I'm sorry, the pedestrian

23:01 ↗ amenities and connections, compatibility with adjacent residential areas and critical areas.

23:07 ↗ And again, this is at a very high level and the

23:13 ↗ technical report will probably be available provide us with more information

23:18 ↗ regarding the critical areas. So that concludes my presentation and I'm open

23:24 ↗ to any questions otherwise if you'd like to save that for later

23:30 ↗ we have the applicant and their architect here to complement my presentation

23:36 ↗ with some additional information. I'd like to suggest and it's open to

23:42 ↗ discussion that we hold the questions, let the folks

23:48 ↗ go through their presentations, including the members of the

23:54 ↗ public, and then we can deal with the questions

24:00 ↗ later. Is that all right? Okay. Sounds good. Good.

24:06 ↗ We'll do that. Thank you, Amy. And we'll hear

24:12 ↗ from the applicant now. Thanks for getting us started,

24:18 ↗ Amy. The Clark and Gibson Act projects are a

24:23 ↗ part of the triumvirate. I have you, Crawford. Thanks.

24:30 ↗ Steve Crawford, director of capital projects for the Issaquah school district, 565

24:35 ↗ Northwest Holly Street, Issaquah, Washington, 98027. So the Gibson, Eck, and Clark

24:41 ↗ are a part of the package, as Amy explained, that involves the

24:47 ↗ construction of the new Issaquah Middle School. As we started

24:53 ↗ to look at the future of Issaquah schools about seven or eight years ago, it

24:59 ↗ became really apparent that this current Issaquah Middle School site is really compact. It's dense.

25:05 ↗ We don't have all the play fields there that we really need to support a

25:11 ↗ middle school program. We currently bus kids to Tibbetts for softball, et cetera. That the

25:17 ↗ Clark Elementary site was one that had a lot of adjacent underdeveloped use.

25:23 ↗ and that the Clark building being built in 1955 was older and smaller than

25:29 ↗ it needed to be and that we needed additional capacity in the core area.

25:34 ↗ That's kind of been confirmed by the fact that we've grown over 2,000 students

25:40 ↗ in the last five years, over 500 last year, and since October's enrollment we've

25:46 ↗ grown 120 kids so far this year, which is unheard of. So we're seeing

25:52 ↗ pretty explosive growth. The Iskua Middle School is under construction, opens in

25:58 ↗ September. Then in June of this year when the school is out,

26:03 ↗ we will plan to begin demo and reconstruction of the existing Iskua

26:09 ↗ Middle School campus to support the new Clark Elementary. And in September

26:15 ↗ 17, that's planned to open. And as Amy explained, when that's done,

26:20 ↗ then we can move the kids in June out of the existing Clark Elementary into

26:26 ↗ their new home and start the demo of the existing Clark and finish the play

26:32 ↗ fields and such for the high school. So all of these projects are interlinked in

26:38 ↗ terms of timeline and schedule and impact. So here we're looking at the existing front

26:44 ↗ parking lot. This is currently the entry canopy, and this is the existing admin

26:49 ↗ area, library, commons, food service area here. And from beyond this point,

26:55 ↗ there are classrooms here which are all exterior circulation classrooms built in

27:01 ↗ an early California campus style with outside hallways, safety security issues and

27:07 ↗ concerns, single glazing, minimal insulation. It's just an energy hog building. And

27:13 ↗ so that will come down and be replaced with the new --

27:19 ↗ whoops. How do we go back? Amy?

27:25 ↗ Three-story elementary classroom wing, new gym, new music

27:31 ↗ rooms, et cetera. And in this corner over

27:36 ↗ here is the existing 200 building, which is

27:42 ↗ a two-story section of this called Middle School

27:48 ↗ that was built in the mid-'90s. It was originally

27:54 ↗ planned to become the new home for the Tiger Mountain Community High School and over

28:00 ↗ the years that's evolved into a new program which is called Gibson Eck. And while

28:05 ↗ it was initially going to house Tiger at its 70 to 90 kids population level,

28:11 ↗ the projections are that in the future it could become a 250 student school.

28:17 ↗ The plan is to open in September 16 with about 100 students in grades 9

28:23 ↗ to 10, and then it will add 50 or 60 students each of the next

28:29 ↗ two years as new ninth graders so that it eventually becomes a four-year high school.

28:34 ↗ A very innovative, creative program, one that's similar to a number of other programs around

28:40 ↗ the country that's been in operation for up to 20 years. but something

28:46 ↗ that's new and pretty exciting. So as we went through the

28:52 ↗ permitting process for Issaquah Middle School, the traffic impact analysis was

28:57 ↗ completed for not only the Issaquah Middle School but the Tiger

29:03 ↗ Move and the Clark Elementary. As we've seen the program change

29:09 ↗ for Gibson Eck, and the increase in numbers there, we've gone back with

29:15 ↗ the traffic engineer and that's what they're doing in terms of a re-evaluation, a

29:21 ↗ reassessment of the work that was done before to bring it up to current

29:27 ↗ levels. You saw the site plan. This is just kind of a refresher. First

29:32 ↗ Avenue comes in, front parking lot, the existing, this shows the existing footprint of

29:38 ↗ the current Issaquah Middle School with the Commons, library, admin areas, classroom

29:44 ↗ wings, and gym facilities here. This is the existing two-story area, which

29:49 ↗ as Amy noted, we're looking to infill the Commons here, which is

29:55 ↗ currently a concrete impervious area, stairwell, and an elevator shaft to facilitate

30:01 ↗ the program for the Gibson Act. An

30:07 ↗ exterior perspective from the southwest, this is the existing building and the infill of the

30:12 ↗ commons for their new -- or infill of the courtyard area for their new commons.

30:18 ↗ Floor plan, again, the L-shaped portion is an existing building. There's a little bit of

30:24 ↗ remodeled work that will occur in there for some new administrative offices and some reconfiguration

30:30 ↗ of some instructional spaces. And the majority of the new work is the infill of

30:36 ↗ this concrete courtyard area for a commons. So the

30:42 ↗ overall site plan is what's submitted as a part of

30:48 ↗ the Clark Elementary and issues that came up or access

30:54 ↗ the steep slopes. This is currently a paved driveway fire

31:00 ↗ lane here. Pavement at the top of the slope kind

31:06 ↗ of helps protect from infiltration and any potential for

31:11 ↗ sloughage there. Again, it's an existing condition that's been there since probably

31:17 ↗ the mid-60s. You can see that it is fairly intense development. We

31:23 ↗ really are looking at trying to utilize our existing school sites to

31:29 ↗ the best and highest use that we can. We are looking for

31:35 ↗ continued growth. Property is It's hard to acquire. It's going to be very expensive.

31:41 ↗ So we want to be able to utilize our existing sites as well as we

31:46 ↗ can. And that's one of the things that led to the classroom wing being a

31:50 ↗ three-story addition. We've been building two-story elementaries since 2000. But we're seeing the need to

31:55 ↗ go to three. It actually works out really well with kindergarten and first grade on

32:00 ↗ the first floor, second and third on the second, and fourth and fifth on the

32:05 ↗ third floors. So it works out really well. We've been through that

32:10 ↗ programming process with Clark and their staff and the district administration. That comes together

32:16 ↗ well. Amy noted that impervious surface area is something that this plan exceeds the

32:22 ↗ current regulations on. And a 50% allowable area, that's really kind of a suburban

32:28 ↗ standard and something that we would hope to work with in the future.

32:36 ↗ The city also does not consider pervious pavements as a

32:42 ↗ pervious surface. That's counted as an impervious surface. So while

32:48 ↗ other jurisdictions allow that and it helps mitigate significantly paved

32:54 ↗ surface areas, that's not something that's counted here. Currently the

32:59 ↗ entrance circulation is in off of Clark from the front.

33:06 ↗ and loops around through here for a drop off and back out. It's a very

33:10 ↗ short pickup drop off area. It becomes congested and we find that traffic backs up

33:14 ↗ at the light sometimes. The intent and goal here was to provide as long a

33:19 ↗ stacking distance as we could on incoming vehicles, bringing them all the way down to

33:24 ↗ the south end of the site and currently back up and dropping off in this

33:29 ↗ area here. Provides good direct access into the classroom wings, gets as much of a

33:33 ↗ stacking distance as we can, and I can't foresee any way that we would ever

33:38 ↗ stack up cars onto the roadway. And there is a little section right here that's

33:43 ↗ fairly tight. This is an existing building, which we're We want to retain food service

33:48 ↗ in this area. This is the commons. And it just makes good sense to save

33:53 ↗ the good parts of the building. But we do have staff. We do have EAs

33:59 ↗ that help in our pick up, drop off times. We don't anticipate that there's

34:04 ↗ going to be any different numbers that pick up and drop off here than the

34:09 ↗ current Clark. Another positive move is that currently as a middle school, there's about 22

34:15 ↗ buses that pick up and drop off here and use First Avenue. Clark currently has

34:20 ↗ about six buses and might expand to maybe eight. So it would be roughly about

34:25 ↗ a third of what the current total is there. We have planned for the

34:31 ↗ ability for traffic to exit both out Clark to front and back

34:37 ↗ into first to help disperse that traffic into a variety of different

34:43 ↗ traffic patterns depending on an individual's destinations. This is an elevation of

34:49 ↗ the front of the building and this canopy structure is currently what

34:55 ↗ exists and has been the front for Esquaw Middle School. It's going

35:01 ↗ to be redeveloped and modernized and new metal roof, new colors,

35:07 ↗ et cetera, freshened up. You can see the three-story wing back behind,

35:13 ↗ three stories from the inner hard surface play area. Again, this is

35:18 ↗ the hard surface play area and the three-story classroom wing.

35:26 ↗ The west side, the existing commons building here. This is new music, new

35:31 ↗ service yard which becomes fully screened as opposed to the current yard which

35:37 ↗ is open and exposed. And the three-story classroom wing back into the central

35:42 ↗ hard surface play area again. The existing Gym locker room buildings are slated to remain

35:48 ↗ in place at this point in time. Gibson-Eck will use some of the gym facilities.

35:53 ↗ The locker rooms really probably won't be utilized at this point in time or any

35:57 ↗ time in the near future. Quickly through a

36:03 ↗ floor plan, front entrance canopy, this is the

36:08 ↗ main entrance hallway, commons, food service, existing administration

36:14 ↗ area, library. These areas get reconfigured, modernized and

36:19 ↗ basically retain the exterior footprint area. Again, from this point

36:25 ↗ back, the existing one-story open campus classroom areas are going to be taken

36:30 ↗ down and replaced with new music rooms to help support the platform stage

36:36 ↗ area. They've had a robust performance program for an elementary school. There's a

36:42 ↗ new service yard serves directly in, new gym, new toilet

36:47 ↗ rooms, and again the three-story classroom wing. There's an existing building

36:53 ↗ here which has been used as the special ed services building

36:59 ↗ and that will remain, provides very good entrance access from their

37:05 ↗ bus drop-off area right directly in and linkage into the building.

37:11 ↗ Second floor plan, third floor plan, basically a repeat there.

37:20 ↗ And that's pretty much the end of the

37:25 ↗ slides. So I'll go back to the site

37:30 ↗ plan. It seems to be where most of

37:36 ↗ the questions and issues might be. Okay. Steve,

37:41 ↗ I think what we'll do is hold questions

37:47 ↗ and comments until later. Thank you, sir, for

37:52 ↗ your presentation. We'll now go to the public

37:58 ↗ comment section of the of the conference. And again, if you wish

38:03 ↗ to speak, we'd ask you to sign up please on those papers there. And when

38:09 ↗ you come up to the mic, make sure that you give your name and your

38:14 ↗ address. And we've got a good number of people here, which we always like to

38:19 ↗ see. So we ask that you try to limit your comments to about five minutes.

38:25 ↗ Okay? Yeah, I think some folks have already signed up, but we can pass that

38:30 ↗ around. So who would like to begin?

38:38 ↗ So my name is Chris Craven and I live

38:44 ↗ at 580 Front Street South which is basically I'd

38:50 ↗ like to start my comments with a quote. You

38:56 ↗ have brains in your head, you have feet in

39:02 ↗ your shoes, you can steer yourself any direction you

39:08 ↗ choose. You're on your own and you know what you know

39:14 ↗ and you are the one who'll decide where to go. So I think

39:20 ↗ that Issaquah School District and the city of Issaquah have a chance to

39:25 ↗ inspire students, the citizens, visitors and neighbors with this facility that we're looking

39:31 ↗ at. We have a chance to make a facility that is relevant, sustainable

39:37 ↗ and loved for another five generations. This project has

39:43 ↗ an opportunity to decide where we want to go as a community, as a

39:49 ↗ neighborhood, and we should consider the unique character of the area. Right now, the

39:54 ↗ neighborhood, one of the reasons that I wanted to live in the condos that

40:00 ↗ I live in is the walkability of the area. This neighborhood has a walkability

40:06 ↗ score of 62. Not bad. It's not great. It's out of 100. But what I

40:12 ↗ would like to see is that we protect what we have and improve on that

40:16 ↗ in the future. I applaud you for your designs. I think

40:22 ↗ the buildings are well thought out. I think there are some missed opportunities

40:28 ↗ that I'd like to share. I think, you know, this site is spectacular.

40:33 ↗ It has a southern exposure. It has fabulous views to the Squawk Mountain

40:39 ↗ and Tiger Mountain. Those can be both inspiring to students, staff, and the

40:45 ↗ neighborhood. One of the things that I see as a missed opportunity is the orientation

40:50 ↗ of your long building. If you oriented it in the east-west direction, you would actually

40:55 ↗ gain a lot of solar gain to heat the buildings in the wintertime and provide

41:01 ↗ free daylight. And that would be savings over the lifetime of the buildings. It would

41:06 ↗ also be able to maybe free up some of your impervious space that you

41:12 ↗ have by being able to place some of the parking under the buildings. Having

41:18 ↗ covered parking in this environment, as we all know in the recent days, downpours

41:23 ↗ are common. It would be really nice, I think, for the students and the

41:29 ↗ parents to be able to drop their student, children off under a

41:35 ↗ covered area and being able to have the advantage of putting

41:40 ↗ the parking under the buildings creates two advantages. It gets rid

41:46 ↗ of the parking that you're covering up and having the problems

41:51 ↗ with exceeding the 50% and also provide more covered areas for

41:57 ↗ that. You talk about low impact development in your write-up and

42:03 ↗ site development which would utilize the LID techniques. This refers to controlling

42:08 ↗ stormwater runoff through grass swales, permeable pavements, vegetated rooftops, and yet I

42:14 ↗ don't see any of these systems incorporated into your design.

42:20 ↗ You state in there that the paving is not required to

42:26 ↗ be pervious and yet you're exceeding 50%. There's only 216 required

42:32 ↗ parking places and you're exceeding that by 107. So

42:37 ↗ those raise concerns with me. Bike storage, bike racks, it

42:43 ↗ seems like if they were proposed to be all congregated

42:49 ↗ at the entrance that it would actually provide an opportunity

42:54 ↗ to both be visible from people coming and going in front of the facility

43:00 ↗ as well as usually that's the security point where you have lots of eyes of

43:06 ↗ people coming and going and so people would probably be a little bit more or

43:12 ↗ a little bit less apprehensive of their bicycles being vandalized or stolen. We need to

43:18 ↗ improve and promote less dependence on cars. I think that is a given in our

43:23 ↗ society. We all need to get where we're going, drop and get going again.

43:29 ↗ And having long backup lines, whether it's on the streets or within your site,

43:35 ↗ isn't a long-term solution.

43:42 ↗ So I could go through the parking standards, IMC 1809-010, but

43:48 ↗ I'm sure you've read them. I'll just hit on some highlights.

43:53 ↗ It talks about effective use of transportation facilities, alternate methods of

43:59 ↗ moving people, deter traffic congestion, promote environmental quality through less use

44:04 ↗ of fossil fuels, less impervious service, ride sharing and requiring safe, direct,

44:10 ↗ non-motorized access from public right of ways. I don't see that the

44:16 ↗ circulation and parking is effective or gives alternate methods. The plan doesn't

44:22 ↗ deter traffic congestion. It simply moves it to the interior of the

44:27 ↗ site adjacent to residential neighbors. It doesn't promote less fossil fuel, it doesn't highlight

44:33 ↗ ride sharing, or it doesn't prioritize biking. There is nothing in the design that enhances

44:39 ↗ any of the non-motorized access to the site that I've seen. There may be plans,

44:44 ↗ but I don't see it in this. In the handout or

44:50 ↗ the brochures that were mailed out on page 29 of 67, staff talks

44:55 ↗ about being concerned about the parent drop off and the fire marshal commented

45:01 ↗ on the concern of pickup and drop offs in that narrow. I concur

45:07 ↗ with these concerns. All the undesirable things are being pushed to

45:12 ↗ the southern end of the property, which directly impacts the quality of life for

45:18 ↗ me at Issaquah Crown. Parking that can't be monitored, Parent drop-offs, backups, and

45:24 ↗ idling traffic, and ugly portable buildings. That's what we get to see as a

45:30 ↗ neighbor. And I don't really see, there is a requirement in here that you

45:36 ↗ provide the site analysis from all of the surrounding, but I don't see that

45:41 ↗ the parking areas and the portables are part of what was portrayed in the

45:47 ↗ building depictions that we've seen. So I would love

45:53 ↗ to look out through the trees of our site and see a beautiful

45:59 ↗ building with classrooms, maybe some vegetable gardens for children and kids playing. I

46:04 ↗ really don't want to look out and see parking and portable buildings up

46:10 ↗ against our fence. So the parking in the southwest corner, there's a 30-foot

46:16 ↗ setback here that it talks about the setbacks for buildings. The parking

46:22 ↗ impedes on that and I don't see that there's a sufficient setback

46:28 ↗ or buffer along the southern edge to keep stormwater runoff noise fumes

46:35 ↗ any of the heat island effects, glares from the lighting from coming into our property.

46:40 ↗ I think that's a big concern in the southwest corner there. Not only that, but

46:46 ↗ that parking lot isn't probably gonna be used during the weekends as well because it's

46:51 ↗ right next to the ball field. So not only do we get it all during

46:57 ↗ the week when the school's in session, we'll get it all weekend as well.

47:05 ↗ I'm concerned about the parking, building, and lighting. I'd like to see minimizing

47:11 ↗ the harmful effects of light pollution. And what can be done is only

47:17 ↗ use lighting where it's needed, equip it with motion detectors or daylight sensors,

47:23 ↗ only light the areas that need to be lit, be no brighter than

47:29 ↗ necessary and minimize the blue light emissions. And most importantly, fully shield the lighting. I've

47:35 ↗ got a picture here at night which you can see the white spots from the

47:41 ↗ existing lighting and basically our bedroom faces north out into the field and a fully

47:46 ↗ drawn shade is required to block the lighting from coming in. So it would be

47:52 ↗ nice if we could improve on that.

47:58 ↗ I'll also leave a handout as submission too so that you have this. I

48:04 ↗ already mentioned the analysis of the required views so it would be nice to

48:10 ↗ see the entire site and exactly what it's going to look like including the

48:16 ↗ portables and the parking areas. The landscaping really isn't defined, it's vague. They talk about

48:22 ↗ a removal of a couple of trees around the perimeter for grading. I'd like to

48:28 ↗ see that be more identified on plans and open for public review. There's a reduction

48:34 ↗ in the play field and there's a statement in there, they're gonna be going from

48:40 ↗ grass to sand. So I have concerns of dust being a problem over the long

48:46 ↗ term. And out of everything, that is being pushed up,

48:52 ↗ I'm concerned about the construction period. So construction basically from what

48:57 ↗ I've been reading goes from April of 2016 through August of

49:03 ↗ 2017. That's 17 months and then in addition to that,

49:09 ↗ there are future portables as needed, which will be even more construction bringing those

49:15 ↗ in. So the questions I have are what mitigations will be given for noise

49:21 ↗ and dust during construction? Can we ask for no weakened power tools or heavy

49:27 ↗ equipment being worked? Will our water pressure be impacted during construction or after occupancy?

49:34 ↗ And then will construction truck drive routes be reviewed for public comment because

49:39 ↗ it is a very congested area. How are you going to get in

49:45 ↗ and out with the construction equipment? It says there's minimal grading but if

49:51 ↗ I do the calculations of 11,600 cubic yards, A truck and trailer, not just

49:57 ↗ a truck, but a truck and trailer, which is going to be hard to

50:03 ↗ maneuver in here, carries 20 cubic yards. That's 580 loads. Let's say we can

50:08 ↗ do 10 loads a day. That's 58 days of trucking, 11,600 cubic yards, which

50:14 ↗ is minimal grading. My closing remarks are expansion of non-conforming

50:20 ↗ situation and encroaching in the wetland buffer. Clark Elementary School does not comply

50:25 ↗ with the required height limit and maximum impervious area. This is from your

50:31 ↗ report. All of this would be insignificant to me if the buildings in

50:37 ↗ the site were thoughtful, beautiful, and provide a truly inspiring facility to many

50:43 ↗ generations of Issaquah students. The project needs to be sympathetic to all neighbors

50:48 ↗ and not just the front door right-aways. I'm gonna leave you with another

50:54 ↗ Dr. Seuss saying, "Think left and think right, "and think low and think

50:59 ↗ high. Oh, the things you can think of

51:05 ↗ if only you try. Thank you. Thank you. Mr.

51:11 ↗ Tonka, Jeff Tonka. Good evening. I'm Jeff Tonka. I

51:16 ↗ live at 580 Front Street South here in Issaquah.

51:22 ↗ I've been a resident of Old Town Issaquah for

51:28 ↗ about 25 years at this address, and it's at

51:34 ↗ the same condominiums that the previous speaker mentioned.

51:40 ↗ A lot of my comments are somewhat repetitious of the previous speaker. She did a

51:44 ↗ very eloquent job in hitting on a lot of the points. A lot of the

51:49 ↗ things that I'm going to hit on is just going to be bullet points, not

51:54 ↗ necessarily on construction or layout of the property, but really impacts from somebody that has

51:58 ↗ lived next door for a long period of time. And during that time, I do

52:03 ↗ want to state that our two largest neighbors, one is Squaw School District, who I'm

52:08 ↗ going to say we have a pretty good relationship. We've had issues from time to

52:12 ↗ time, but they've always allowed us to come in and review those issues with them.

52:17 ↗ And just recently, we talked about this within the past couple of months. and also

52:21 ↗ the city of Iskua. Our property comes up right against the Rainier Trail, which we

52:26 ↗ recently had some big issues with that we were able to work with various city

52:31 ↗ departments on to abate those issues. So I'm hoping that with this type of meeting

52:36 ↗ that we can bring out some of the issues and maybe have them addressed in

52:41 ↗ some of the action items prior to final design and construction. Again, our property is

52:46 ↗ immediately south of this site. It's several hundred feet long and our property ranges from

52:51 ↗ being above grade of this field and I'm going to use the word field because

52:56 ↗ that's what it is. It's presently a pretty much a flat piece of land. to

53:01 ↗ being at grade to below grade. And in one of the reports it said, hey,

53:06 ↗ the multifamily structures next door are two stories high. We're actually three stories high. And

53:11 ↗ therefore, it's going to make a difference in view looking over to this property depending

53:16 ↗ on where you are relative to our side of the lot. We are very concerned

53:22 ↗ about the impact to our entire property, particularly with what's being proposed here.

53:28 ↗ The impact is varied, both direct and indirect, again to our quality of

53:34 ↗ life and potentially to our property values. The impact is visual. It's going to

53:40 ↗ be sound, lighting, and I don't have a good word for this next one, but

53:45 ↗ I'm going to call it movement distraction. Maybe that goes into the visual category, but

53:50 ↗ it seems like there's going to be a lot of movement on this property that

53:54 ↗ presently does not exist. Construction, again, it looks like it's potentially could kick off as

53:59 ↗ early as next month and go through to August 2017. Construction, at least what they're

54:04 ↗ projecting here, is likely going to be fairly loud. It's going to be dust concerns

54:10 ↗ and just the duration. And I'm going to digress to a recent project that transpired

54:16 ↗ over the past year that had a direct impact on our property, and that was

54:22 ↗ the build out of the ISD Transit Center. With that project, there was a lot

54:27 ↗ of excavation, a lot more excavation that is being projected here. First off, it started

54:32 ↗ off with a lot of chainsawing, removal of a lot of trees. We probably listened

54:37 ↗ to chainsaws for about two and a half, almost maybe going on three weeks. And

54:42 ↗ then after that, there was many, many, many weeks of excavation. And I think that

54:46 ↗ was then followed by a lot of backfill of heavy rockery and whatnot. Again, I

54:51 ↗ don't have a background in construction. All I can tell you is what it sounds

54:57 ↗ like. It was very loud starting from 7:00 in the morning and went through to

55:03 ↗ about 4:00 in the afternoon. A lot of equipment, heavy equipment, both scooping, dumping, trucks

55:08 ↗ backing up, very disruptive. The interesting thing is that once all that was done, there

55:14 ↗ was impacts that weren't realized. unintended consequences, if you will, to our property, things that

55:20 ↗ I don't think the city realized, the school district realized, and we sure as heck

55:25 ↗ didn't. As a result of this build-out, we now get a lot more noise transmission

55:30 ↗ coming from the ISCWA district ISD Transit Center in the form of vehicle noise. Primarily

55:35 ↗ it's the buses backing up, they're beeping audible noises, again, which we're in discussions with

55:40 ↗ ISD on right now. We can hear the buses firing up, which we never heard

55:45 ↗ before. And I think that had a lot to do with removal of a huge

55:50 ↗ hillside and again, a lot of vegetation, a lot of trees. The

55:56 ↗ remodel of this school is much larger than anticipated. It's going from one school to

56:01 ↗ two schools. I think we've kind of heard the plans on that. Again, we're a

56:07 ↗ little surprised at the redefinition of the plan. It sounds like it's going up

56:12 ↗ to three stories, but with the attic substructures, it looks like it's going

56:18 ↗ to be more visible representing four stories. Again, something that we're really not

56:24 ↗ used to seeing going directly north from our property. We're concerned about where

56:30 ↗ the track is, and primarily that acts as a buffer right now, not

56:36 ↗ only visibly, but with sound and light abatement. Again, I understand that that

56:42 ↗ is prime building and there is going to be some facilities put there, but again,

56:47 ↗ it's a big change for our property, something I don't think that was really anticipated

56:52 ↗ or accounted for. Again, our immediate property is approximately 50 homes. There's also the folks

56:58 ↗ that live on the west side of the property that are going to be impacted

57:03 ↗ here as well, the individual homeowners. The parking areas, which is drawing a lot of

57:08 ↗ interest here, The concerns are visual, again, both cars, potential glare, so on and so

57:14 ↗ forth. Noise for me is gonna be paramount. Not only of the vehicle noises, but

57:19 ↗ also car doors. I don't think that's really been talked about a lot as far

57:25 ↗ as this drop off as well in parking. Slamming doors are loud. Exhaust, the lighting

57:31 ↗ from the cars. Again, this is a flat area. When cars pull in and you

57:36 ↗ have headlights, again, this time of year particularly early school drop-off are going to be

57:42 ↗ going across the property shining through probably onto three of our four buildings there's also

57:48 ↗ going to be brake lights there's going to be potential idling issues maybe not idling

57:53 ↗ when they're stopped waiting for pickup but during the drop-off when it's an active offload

57:59 ↗ speaking of offload. I know that the goal of doing this is many fold but

58:05 ↗ one of them from the report said was to alleviate traffic congestion at the intersection

58:10 ↗ of Front Street and Clark. I guess my frustration there lies in the fact that

58:15 ↗ you're trying to alleviate the problem there by putting it literally in my backyard. And

58:20 ↗ I don't know if that's the best way to do it. And I don't know

58:24 ↗ if it's really going to alleviate the problem. Yes, it will allow for a lot

58:28 ↗ of stacking, but I heard here earlier tonight elementary schools have a lot more drop

58:32 ↗ off. And what does a lot more mean? Are we talking about 200 parents a

58:37 ↗ day dropping their kids off in the morning and then the same 200 parents coming

58:41 ↗ back in the evening. That's a lot of movement through here. And again, I'm most

58:45 ↗ concerned about my area down here on the south part of the property. I don't

58:50 ↗ know if there's anybody here that lives west of the property that's concerned about that

58:54 ↗ corridor right next to probably some brick and metal structures that's just going to be

58:59 ↗ pushing that sound out in that direction. I think there needs to be some abatement

59:03 ↗ issues. with that i'm also concerned about lighting lighting from the property and i know

59:08 ↗ that there is new lighting technology we heard some from the previous speaker and also

59:13 ↗ in talking to the folks at isd they they said that they can come up

59:18 ↗ with some clever ideas but still there's going to be more lighting that's closer to

59:23 ↗ our property line than does not exist today i'm also concerned about sound both direct

59:28 ↗ sound and indirect sound direct sound it could be classroom bells. It could be facility

59:33 ↗ air conditioners and heating noise from some of these substructures or portables that are going

59:38 ↗ to be closer to the property line. It could just be a lot more people

59:43 ↗ on this property. I heard estimates here tonight of upwards of 800 students and 200

59:49 ↗ staff with potential for future expansion. That's a lot of people on this property that

59:54 ↗ don't exist right now. I don't know what the current population is, but I know

59:59 ↗ it's not that high. I'm also concerned about some of the other visual aspects

1:00:05 ↗ of the building. It sounds like it's going to be nice architecture. I'm not here

1:00:10 ↗ to say that it's not. I'm concerned about the utilities. Where's the trash and the

1:00:14 ↗ recycling and the electrical transformers going to go? It seems like that stuff always makes

1:00:19 ↗ it to the back of the building. Maybe that's included in part of the design

1:00:24 ↗ phase where that's going to be somewhat hidden. I hope so.

1:00:31 ↗ There doesn't seem to be much of a plan for screening. And I know the

1:00:36 ↗ word screening is very generic. For me, screening needs to be more than just plant

1:00:41 ↗ material. We need screening that's going to provide visual screening. Again, for a lot of

1:00:46 ↗ the visual, the lighting, I'm going to call it the movement, the distraction, if you

1:00:51 ↗ will, that's always going to be catching you in the side of the eye to

1:00:56 ↗ make you look up. Noise screening, exhaust screening, and...

1:01:02 ↗ My big concern here is just not of the plan, but going back to the

1:01:07 ↗ example I gave on the build out of the transit center, it's the unintended consequences,

1:01:13 ↗ the things that we haven't even realized yet that are going to impact our immediate

1:01:18 ↗ neighborhood. We're also concerned about potential safety and trespass as well. We currently get a

1:01:23 ↗ lot of trespass issues directly related to school activities, both students and adults jumping the

1:01:28 ↗ fence, coming directly south off the field into our property, and also coming through the

1:01:34 ↗ wetlands buffer from the Rainier Trail when school lets out coming into our property as

1:01:39 ↗ well. We're very concerned that we're just going to see an uptick in that movement

1:01:44 ↗ as well. That concludes my comments for this evening.

1:01:50 ↗ Thanks. Mr. Tanaka. Mr. William Robertson. I just recently moved

1:01:56 ↗ here. Would you repeat your, say your name and your

1:02:02 ↗ address please and speak into the microphone. William Robertson, 580

1:02:07 ↗ Front Street South, Building B. I recently moved here and

1:02:13 ↗ the reason I moved here was for quiet and peace.

1:02:19 ↗ And if you'd appreciate my-- I'm retired law enforcement. And

1:02:25 ↗ who's going to patrol this? Yes, sir. Could you stay

1:02:31 ↗ at the mic, please? In the evenings, who's going to

1:02:37 ↗ patrol or monitor that cul-de-sac, if you will, down at

1:02:43 ↗ the end, just to the north of our property, where

1:02:49 ↗ youths will be drinking, doing narcotics, sex, what have

1:02:54 ↗ you, in that southern cul-de-sac, which is the parent drop-off

1:03:00 ↗ area? Who's gonna be patrolling that? Is that gonna be

1:03:06 ↗ something that law enforcement's gonna have to stay down there

1:03:11 ↗ in the evening and monitor? Are we developing something that

1:03:17 ↗ we really don't want to develop or start? That's

1:03:23 ↗ one thing I wanted to mention. The other thing is my

1:03:29 ↗ wife is a very light sleeper and the lights coming down,

1:03:35 ↗ I don't know, you think 200 vehicles, 300 vehicles in the

1:03:40 ↗ morning while we're trying to sleep. It's sort of like a

1:03:46 ↗ cul-de-sac that was relatively dead And now that cul-de-sac, you have

1:03:52 ↗ 200 cars coming down your cul-de-sac every morning. It seems like a

1:03:58 ↗ good idea if there's nobody lived to the south there. But I

1:04:04 ↗ guess my main concern is a safety issue in the evening, late

1:04:09 ↗ hours. Who's going to patrol that? What kind of crime is going

1:04:15 ↗ to happen down there? What's going to be going on in there?

1:04:21 ↗ Just sort of a place for crime to fester.

1:04:36 ↗ I concur with the previous speakers. They

1:04:41 ↗ had some very strong points. But the

1:04:47 ↗ people that live to the south, that's

1:04:52 ↗ all I have. Thank you, sir. Edgar,

1:04:57 ↗ I'm sorry, I can't -- Rochelson. My

1:05:03 ↗ name is Edgar Rochelson. I live at

1:05:08 ↗ 580 Front Street South, which is part

1:05:13 ↗ of the Issaquah Crown Condominium complex. I'm

1:05:19 ↗ here to talk mainly about boundary considerations along the

1:05:25 ↗ south side. In reading through the proposal, you mentioned

1:05:31 ↗ landscaping only around parking areas, and we're talking about

1:05:37 ↗ a lot more. We're not just talking about a

1:05:43 ↗ parking lot. We're not talking about a play field.

1:05:48 ↗ We're talking about over 200 linear feet of property.

1:05:55 ↗ A few years ago, standing in this very place, I talked

1:06:01 ↗ to, or talked in front of the city council when they

1:06:07 ↗ were proposing using the play field as a soccer field for

1:06:12 ↗ a soccer league. And at that time, I started off my

1:06:18 ↗ remarks by saying that as I stand here now, my bedroom

1:06:24 ↗ is closer to the property line than I am standing to you.

1:06:30 ↗ And not only I can say that, 17 of my neighbors can

1:06:36 ↗ say the same thing. So the main concern for a lot of

1:06:42 ↗ us as we live very close to the property boundary is what

1:06:48 ↗ you are going to use as a buffer all the way around

1:06:54 ↗ to preserve as much as possible our quality of life. Excuse me,

1:06:59 ↗ I just had to refer to my notes there. Now, as I

1:07:05 ↗ walk along Front Street to the bus each morning and back in the evening, in

1:07:11 ↗ the stretch between Clark Street and reaching the entrance to our condominium complex, there are

1:07:16 ↗ two properties that have very tall and very thick hedges, and they in effect block

1:07:22 ↗ off the noise and the sight of Front Street, which as we all know is

1:07:28 ↗ very heavily traveled. And I would like staff, the commission, whoever else

1:07:33 ↗ would be involved in this, to look into the feasibility of planting hedges

1:07:39 ↗ at least 10 to 12 feet high, if not higher, as long as

1:07:45 ↗ it's feasible, in order to protect us from the noise, the light, the

1:07:51 ↗ sound, the construction dirt, and anything else that would affect our quality of

1:07:57 ↗ life. This will not only be a school day project

1:08:02 ↗ or a school day use of the facilities. I'm sure the athletic facilities

1:08:08 ↗ are going to be used at night too. There will probably be additional

1:08:14 ↗ events going on in the various buildings on the school campus, which means

1:08:20 ↗ more cars, more pedestrian traffic, more noise, more light, and more disturbing of

1:08:26 ↗ our quiet enjoyment of the facilities. I don't expect a decision from you all

1:08:32 ↗ tonight. This is something, pardon the pun, I would like to plant the seed for.

1:08:38 ↗ To look into what would be the best barrier, if you will, to absorb all

1:08:44 ↗ the sounds and all the noise and all the dust and still be aesthetically pleasing

1:08:49 ↗ and preserve our quality of life. And also for the

1:08:55 ↗ construction too. I don't know how feasible it would be to plant these trees before

1:09:00 ↗ all the work starts, but with work starting at 7 a.m. or sometimes earlier if

1:09:05 ↗ everybody marshals there first, it's going to wake up a lot of people. And if

1:09:10 ↗ there's overtime involved in Saturdays, it's going to wake up a lot more people because

1:09:15 ↗ most of us don't go to work on the weekends. So that is basically what

1:09:21 ↗ I wanted to address you all on and ask that it all be strongly

1:09:27 ↗ considered. A wall is not aesthetic. Certainly the wire mesh fence that we have

1:09:33 ↗ now is not aesthetic or effective. As Mr. Tanker said, there are people who

1:09:39 ↗ can easily climb over it. So I would ask again that

1:09:45 ↗ you seriously consider a strong, in effect, continuous hedge going along the entire

1:09:51 ↗ south end of the property to separate the school facility from the Issaquah

1:09:57 ↗ Crown condominium. Thank you. Thank you, sir. The next person on the list

1:10:03 ↗ that has signed up is Mr. Greg Craven. My name is Greg Craven.

1:10:09 ↗ I live at 580 Front Street, the Issaquah Crown condominiums. My concerns

1:10:15 ↗ are obviously what everyone else has been talking about, the noise in the site with

1:10:20 ↗ the lights and everything. I can go over them all again, but they've all been

1:10:25 ↗ touched on. The dirt with the new field. I did go to that school when

1:10:30 ↗ I was younger and quite a bit younger, and we loved that field out there.

1:10:36 ↗ It was a great field, but it was nowhere near as nice as it is

1:10:41 ↗ now. But one of the concerns I have is if there is a fire, where

1:10:46 ↗ is your access for the students to go to? We all went out the back

1:10:50 ↗ door and stood out in that field. I don't see much room for people to

1:10:54 ↗ go get away from the buildings. I also do not see a way that anyone

1:10:59 ↗ can access or leave from the back if there is a fire or any catastrophe

1:11:03 ↗ or panic if you have vehicles trying to come in or out on either side,

1:11:07 ↗ fire trucks, aid units, something's going on, people need to leave,

1:11:13 ↗ they're trapped in the back. So those are my concerns.

1:11:19 ↗ Thank you, sir. Alicia Hunt or Hurt? All right. Thank

1:11:25 ↗ you. Elaine Fisher? All right. Is there anyone else, any

1:11:31 ↗ other member of the public that would like to speak?

1:11:36 ↗ Okay. And my name is Mary Lynch. I reside at

1:11:42 ↗ 2690 Northwest Oakcrest Drive, Issaquah, Washington. And I just want to

1:11:48 ↗ say I concur with what the people have said before, especially when I just

1:11:54 ↗ stamp, rubber stamp what Chris said about sustainable schools and looking at maybe small

1:11:59 ↗ alternatives for the building to be more sustainable, rain gardens, solar heat, other things.

1:12:06 ↗ But one of my primary reasons is to say that I think this needs to

1:12:10 ↗ be really reviewed by the city's walk and roll program and safe routes to school

1:12:15 ↗ program that you have and those guidelines because I currently see that most of these

1:12:19 ↗ students that go to Clark are coming from Old Town, the Highlands and Preston. And

1:12:24 ↗ so the walking paths really need to be clearly identified and right now we go

1:12:28 ↗ to the very edge of the school property. We don't continue on down the hill

1:12:33 ↗ by the community center, which is not a sidewalk. We don't continue down the other

1:12:38 ↗ side of the street, which is the maintenance building, which we constantly in the morning

1:12:43 ↗ with Issaquah Middle have cars pulling in and out. Parent cars come in there back

1:12:48 ↗ in and out. And even with the buses there, we have continual problems with parents

1:12:53 ↗ trying to drop off with buses. We have people who do not obey the parking

1:12:58 ↗ signs along that and park on the sidewalks. So you're going to have elementary kids

1:13:02 ↗ trying to maneuver their ways through coming up to the school through a mine field.

1:13:07 ↗ The same way if they do come in, there's not going to be that many

1:13:12 ↗ coming, I don't think, off of Front Street. They don't come from that area now,

1:13:17 ↗ but you're going to have more cars coming in. Parents do not shut their cars

1:13:22 ↗ off, believe me. We're required to school bus drivers to turn our buses off. Parents

1:13:26 ↗ do not. So you're gonna have a long line of vehicles down here with cars

1:13:31 ↗ running. If any of you'll go over and see what the problem is at Clark

1:13:36 ↗ or Issaquah Valley and the lineup of cars that we have with people, It's bad

1:13:41 ↗ and they are not looking at anybody else's kids. All they're caring about is their

1:13:45 ↗ kid getting out of the car and they all want to drop off at the

1:13:50 ↗ front unless they're really late and then they'll let their kid get out any place

1:13:54 ↗ along that area. So this area down here is going to be really bad. We

1:13:58 ↗ also, I don't see any identification on where the small buses are going to go.

1:14:03 ↗ This school currently has I think five to six small buses which also are kindergarten,

1:14:07 ↗ preschool and also handicapped. Where are they going to enter? Are they going to have

1:14:12 ↗ to fight with the parents to go into this way which we do at some

1:14:16 ↗ of our schools and which they do right now at Clark and they have tremendous

1:14:21 ↗ trouble in the afternoon getting into Clark, the buses do, all the buses do. So

1:14:26 ↗ I'd like to see what that's happening there. And work proactively in getting the parents

1:14:31 ↗ to use the buses. And that's where we talked on Monday night with city council

1:14:36 ↗ to say that there needs to be more cooperation between the city or the school

1:14:40 ↗ and the city. And that's a big one I see that we can work. And

1:14:45 ↗ maybe getting the PTAs involved. The other problem we have over there on Bush and

1:14:50 ↗ that first or whatever goes up to there is food bank parking. They are parking

1:14:55 ↗ all over the place anytime the food bank is open and it creates a nightmare

1:15:00 ↗ for getting through as well as then the people at the community center. I do

1:15:04 ↗ have problems with the pinch point down here because where, as someone else said, where

1:15:09 ↗ the garbage truck is going to go, where the delivery truck is going to go.

1:15:13 ↗ If we have normally with the fire, if there's an emergency, there's at least two

1:15:18 ↗ and sometimes three fire trucks that come and at least one aid car that comes

1:15:22 ↗ any time an incident happens. So how are they going to get in and out

1:15:27 ↗ of there in a timely fashion? And are they going to get stuck in there

1:15:31 ↗ with parent traffic if it happens right around the bell time? Which in the last

1:15:35 ↗ couple of months we've had at least two incidences where the emergency has happened right

1:15:39 ↗ at the bell time and the buses are held up but if they're expected to

1:15:43 ↗ go in this way with the parents, who's going to keep the parents back from

1:15:47 ↗ there? I guess that's the most of mine. I just say I think we really

1:15:53 ↗ need to make this and look at making this a safe way for kids to

1:15:58 ↗ get to school and to walk to school. Thank you. Thank you. If there's anyone

1:16:02 ↗ else that would like to speak, please make sure that I know that you have.

1:16:07 ↗ Sir, if you want to, this gentleman here in the front, go ahead. Why don't

1:16:12 ↗ you stand up? And when you come up, sir, would you make sure that you

1:16:16 ↗ have signed in the list? Okay. Thank you.

1:16:23 ↗ Hi, and thank you all for the job that you do. My name is Steve

1:16:28 ↗ Pereira. I live at 170 Northeast Dogwood Street. I've definitely heard the concerns of the

1:16:33 ↗ people that live adjacent to the property. I don't live adjacent to the property. There

1:16:38 ↗ was a recent meeting on and showing the film Urbanization, which definitely seems to be

1:16:43 ↗ happening here in Issaquah. Part of what I guess I don't see is kind of

1:16:48 ↗ this idea of I know Front Street and Sunset are really pretty packed already. We're

1:16:52 ↗ going to add a whole bunch of new traffic to the site. Is there a

1:16:58 ↗ way of making a more coherent plan than just this particular school site but with

1:17:03 ↗ how the traffic and how people are going to continue to get in and out

1:17:07 ↗ of the site as part of the overall plan? It seems we're just having separate

1:17:12 ↗ pieces going in but not an overall look going into that. And that needs to

1:17:17 ↗ be part of the consideration for the school, not just the school by itself or

1:17:22 ↗ a middle school and a high school. how that impacts the overall Old Town, how

1:17:27 ↗ that impacts Izaquahoga as a whole, where we're going. So I just think there needs

1:17:32 ↗ to be more consideration of that before approval of this particular combined middle school and

1:17:38 ↗ high school site that isn't currently designed for that. So please, let's take some more

1:17:43 ↗ time for part of that consideration as well as considering the impact to the immediate

1:17:48 ↗ adjacent neighbors. Thank you. Thank you, sir.

1:17:58 ↗ Good evening. My name is Tom Griffin, 580 Front Street South in

1:18:04 ↗ Issaquah. I'm also part of the Issaquah Crown and just wanted to

1:18:10 ↗ voice my concern about the temporary pods. There wasn't much discussion or

1:18:16 ↗ details provided in either presentation about the temporary units on the southern

1:18:21 ↗ end. And currently right now they're showing up as being temporary pods, one stories

1:18:27 ↗ and so forth. But as we all know, as time goes by, I'm sure that

1:18:33 ↗ the campus and the need for growth for the increase of students will also increase

1:18:39 ↗ as well. And based upon what I can see from the drawings and the structures

1:18:45 ↗ and so forth, if there is going to be an increase, and the population

1:18:51 ↗ size of the school, the natural progression of the growth would come from those

1:18:57 ↗ pods and taking those temporary structures out and putting larger structures in that existing

1:19:03 ↗ site. So that is my concern. And there hasn't been any discussion as to

1:19:09 ↗ what the long-term plans are for this site and specifically addressing and

1:19:14 ↗ dealing with those pods that are currently on the plans.

1:19:20 ↗ So just wanted to bring that up. Thank you. If

1:19:25 ↗ there are no more members of the public that wish

1:19:31 ↗ to speak, at this point we will close the public

1:19:36 ↗ participation and open it to commissioners' questions. What we'll do, what

1:19:42 ↗ we normally do in this case is allow each of the commissioners-- we're not allowing

1:19:48 ↗ it-- but each of the commissioners will seek clarification of specific points, either in the

1:19:54 ↗ applicant's plan, the staff report, or the comments that were made here by staff and

1:20:00 ↗ applicant. And once we go through the clarifications and so on, we'll come back. And

1:20:05 ↗ then each commissioner will express their opinion, make recommendations, observations, and things like that.

1:20:11 ↗ So with that, we'll start with Commissioner Higgs. Do you have any questions, clarifications,

1:20:17 ↗ or anything like that? I have my first question would be

1:20:23 ↗ about the fire access, the emergency vehicle access. How is that being

1:20:29 ↗ addressed and how is ISD working with the Eastside Fire Department to

1:20:35 ↗ make the accommodations and corrections for the access for the fire department

1:20:41 ↗ and emergency vehicles? So I'm going to start off by saying that

1:20:46 ↗ we have only done some very, very preliminary review of this, which is reflected in

1:20:52 ↗ the staff report. So we will be following up with the school district as far

1:20:58 ↗ as with the with coordination for the review of the fire access. However, I think

1:21:04 ↗ Mr Crawford will be able to answer how they have thought through the operations and

1:21:10 ↗ how they would deal with potential emergencies on site. Thank you. So

1:21:16 ↗ at pick up and drop off times, we do have staff and EA

1:21:21 ↗ staff that assist and help control traffic. So any areas that are concerns,

1:21:27 ↗ we have staff to help monitor and move traffic. There is a fire

1:21:33 ↗ loop that loops all the way around the building. So there is alternative

1:21:39 ↗ access for fire emergency vehicles all the way around the perimeter of the

1:21:44 ↗ building. Excuse me. There would be traffic coming in. This is the section of

1:21:50 ↗ drop-off area where you do have some stationary cars. And once cars are leaving there,

1:21:55 ↗ they're going to be moving until you get up to another point where there might

1:22:00 ↗ be a little bit of a decision point into these areas here. But I think

1:22:05 ↗ in large part, traffic through here is going to be moving. The service yard is

1:22:10 ↗ here. That's where trash and dumpsters and things are. Those activities are scheduled for outside

1:22:15 ↗ of the the drop off or pick up times, all of those service

1:22:21 ↗ providers and our own district staff know that those are not times that

1:22:27 ↗ they want to be coming onto a school site. That's something that's already

1:22:33 ↗ a scheduling issue that's addressed. Can I do a follow up question? As

1:22:38 ↗ I understand it from the packet and from the presentations, those traffic

1:22:44 ↗ lanes, the car lanes, are basically one way, right? - Two way. -

1:22:50 ↗ There's two way traffic here. There's an entrance lane and there's an exit

1:22:55 ↗ lane. - Okay. - And those are standard traffic lane widths. - Okay,

1:23:01 ↗ so, but the cars come down and go down the parent drop off

1:23:07 ↗ and go down to turn around there. - Cars come in, loop around,

1:23:13 ↗ We always want them to drop off on the right side so the kids

1:23:19 ↗ are getting dropped off on the curb side. So the drop off area is

1:23:25 ↗ along this sidewalk area here. And that's the discharge point at the north end

1:23:31 ↗ and then exiting back out. So basically you have a typical two lane roadway

1:23:37 ↗ that passes from this section to this point. With a sense of a drop

1:23:43 ↗ off lane? So I'm sorry if you're going to comment you have to come up

1:23:47 ↗ to that. Please do if you want to. Yeah, there's two lanes of traffic. There's

1:23:51 ↗ an inbound lane here. There's a free outbound lane as well as the 10 foot

1:23:55 ↗ drop off lane. So that's a 30 foot wide section of the pavement. CHRIS JERRAM:

1:24:00 ↗ Commissioner Hicks had a question about the timing of the parent drop off or pickup

1:24:06 ↗ and an emergency. And I believe there was an observation made by a member of

1:24:11 ↗ the public that there have been some recent-- times when both of

1:24:17 ↗ those have occurred when there's been an emergency. So if there is an

1:24:22 ↗ emergency of some nature in the corner down there, those areas right in

1:24:28 ↗ there, how would emergency vehicles access that area? Assuming that the pickup and

1:24:34 ↗ drop off lane is CHRIS RODGERS: If you had an emergency event and

1:24:39 ↗ there was inbound traffic here, staff would get traffic out of here to free

1:24:45 ↗ up the lane. There's also the option of coming in from the east side.

1:24:51 ↗ So in essence, you have a two-lane road here, just as you have in

1:24:56 ↗ any number of locations around the city. CHRIS RODGERS: But the access on the

1:25:02 ↗ far side on the opposite side from the parent pick-up. That

1:25:08 ↗ is normally open? It's staff parking? There's parking on the sides. The center is

1:25:14 ↗ a 20-foot dedicated fire lane that loops all the way back around. So would

1:25:20 ↗ that not be the primary access in the plan for that? I think the

1:25:26 ↗ emergency providers would see that as their first. first point of access, their

1:25:31 ↗ primary point. I do believe that the congestion in this whole area will be

1:25:37 ↗ far less than what we currently see here, which consistently backs up traffic down

1:25:42 ↗ to the light. And so if there was an inbound emergency vehicle trying to

1:25:48 ↗ get in here, any time in the near future or recent past when it

1:25:54 ↗ was pick-up/drop-off time, they'd have a heck of time coming up the road. COMMISSIONER

1:25:59 ↗ MAY: Commissioner Sellem? I'm concerned about the Southwest parking. And if I

1:26:05 ↗ understand what was written, the plan exceeds the required number of parking spots. Is

1:26:11 ↗ that correct? CHRIS RODGERS: It does exceed the number of parking spots. I believe

1:26:16 ↗ the number that's required is 216, and we provide for 242. We

1:26:22 ↗ typically, the number that we provide is what we would typically

1:26:28 ↗ find at our other elementary schools and similar facilities. So

1:26:33 ↗ there is a difference between 216 and 242. There are events at

1:26:39 ↗ school facilities that bring in larger crowds for kindergarten roundup days and

1:26:45 ↗ Christmas programs and things like that. There was another additional 81 spaces

1:26:51 ↗ that can be used for those high volume events that's on the

1:26:57 ↗ paved play field areas. So the number that was said that said

1:27:03 ↗ we were providing 100 or something more than what we are required to is

1:27:08 ↗ is only when you're using the play field areas for large scale events. And

1:27:14 ↗ just for clarification, the land use code doesn't have a maximum limit for parking,

1:27:20 ↗ only a minimum. Well, it seems like the the maximum may be

1:27:26 ↗ a critical thing to think about because the reality is if you've got an impervious

1:27:31 ↗ violation or an inability to meet your impervious surface requirement and you've got a community

1:27:36 ↗ at the south of the property that is saying we're really worried about the impacts

1:27:41 ↗ of this, if you've exceeded the number of parking spots that you have, that would

1:27:46 ↗ not seem unreasonable. I think maybe you could eliminate a good portion of some of

1:27:50 ↗ that parking on the south, move the buff, extend the buffer and create some of

1:27:55 ↗ that buffering that the people are asking for. It just seems like that. I guess

1:28:01 ↗ my other concern was really being concerned about the-- excess of impervious space

1:28:07 ↗ especially when you have a pretty significant drop off on the west side you're going

1:28:12 ↗ to increase water flow over that and i don't know what's going to happen to

1:28:17 ↗ stabilize that i guess i didn't read it into anything that was going to be

1:28:22 ↗ happening to stabilize that drop off there but if you're getting excess water over that

1:28:26 ↗ that just is kind of a recipe for disaster and i had concerns over the

1:28:32 ↗ the emergency access to, but you did a good job. I understand what the plan

1:28:36 ↗ is now, so thank you. This driveway on the west side currently is paved, and

1:28:41 ↗ there's catch basin system there, so there is no runoff from that paved area over

1:28:45 ↗ the bank. and that would continue and be enhanced in this new development so that

1:28:51 ↗ there is no infiltration of surface water at the top of the bank or runoff

1:28:57 ↗ that goes down over the bank. The other thing I would point out is that

1:29:03 ↗ the stormwater management plan for this initially included rain gardens and other low impact development

1:29:09 ↗ features. The whole play field area is an infiltration basin. this site

1:29:14 ↗ will is designed to infiltrate 100 of the storm water uh this is

1:29:20 ↗ what middle school infiltrates the new school will infiltrate 100 of the storm

1:29:26 ↗ water and it's why i feel infiltrates 100 of its storm water thanks

1:29:31 ↗ thank you mr bryant so um i had similar thoughts or comments um

1:29:37 ↗ maybe a question for staff so amy the Is there a

1:29:43 ↗ perimeter landscaping minimum width requirement for this project? There's actually

1:29:49 ↗ several. The way the landscape standards are set up, depending

1:29:55 ↗ on different types of uses and transition, there is transition

1:30:01 ↗ landscaping that's required. And for parking, in this case,

1:30:06 ↗ There's some limits to the way the land use

1:30:12 ↗ code provides for buffering. Unfortunately, where you have properties

1:30:18 ↗ adjacent to other residential, the buffering is a little different than if it was

1:30:23 ↗ abutting a public right-of-way. But I can come back, I can return next time

1:30:29 ↗ with a more detailed analysis of that. Yeah, I guess I'm just looking at

1:30:35 ↗ the site and the amount of development and impervious, kind of back to the

1:30:40 ↗ theme of we're kind of really stretching the impervious and maximizing the development on

1:30:46 ↗ the site, which I understand the districts need to provide capacity for a growing number

1:30:52 ↗ of students. But it just seems like we've got an awful lot of hard surface

1:30:58 ↗ here and maybe there is some opportunity to improve landscaping because I it's a

1:31:04 ↗ better quality of experience for the kids that are on the campus, incorporate more low

1:31:09 ↗ impact development techniques. Thinking back at Issaquah High School and when we reviewed that, some

1:31:15 ↗ really great stuff was done on that site. And maybe there's some opportunities, maybe not

1:31:21 ↗ quite as bold as was possible there. And then the idea of how do we

1:31:26 ↗ provide some screening, taking advantage of both kind of physical screens created by fencing and

1:31:32 ↗ other sorts of fears and softened with some sort of landscaping, I think, in combination

1:31:37 ↗ with kind of what's the code telling us to do here. I think it just

1:31:42 ↗ seems like we're really kind of pushing the boundaries a bit with the amount of

1:31:46 ↗ development that's being pushed onto the site. I do appreciate the infiltration that's happening on

1:31:51 ↗ the play field. I think that's a good thing. So as far as a

1:31:57 ↗ question I just I want to try to I'm not going to I guess we're

1:32:02 ↗ just going to go around and take questions and so just a couple that came

1:32:07 ↗ out from the people who spoke and I really appreciate the comments. Just a simple

1:32:12 ↗ one regarding where you're going to deal with waste management sorts of stuff on

1:32:18 ↗ this property because now we have, you know, obviously trucks that need to come in

1:32:22 ↗ and service that area as well. And I couldn't really pick it up on the

1:32:26 ↗ site. So is that, can you point to that? Yeah, okay. I thought that's it.

1:32:30 ↗ Service yard is here and that's where trash and recycling occurs. Right. So the trucks

1:32:34 ↗ will come in and pick up. It's a screened in area with gates. Right. And

1:32:38 ↗ then they'll pick up and they'll go back down around the loop to come back

1:32:42 ↗ out. They'll come in, loop around, pick up, back up and exit typically. What time

1:32:48 ↗ of day? Those are midday pickups. Again, they schedule around. They know when the

1:32:54 ↗ start and stop times are, and they know not to be there for their

1:33:00 ↗ own good. Just does the district work with the Issaquah Police Department in this

1:33:05 ↗ case to look at site development from a safety standpoint, kind of responding to some

1:33:10 ↗ of the concerns we've heard from? Yeah, we'll we talked with the fire department, we

1:33:15 ↗ talked with our first responders and our SROs to to help ascertain. I mean safety

1:33:20 ↗ and security is one of the primary considerations for the district. Maybe you can just

1:33:24 ↗ speak to a little bit to how you're providing security and trying to prevent people

1:33:29 ↗ from accessing the back part of that property which is I think what the concern

1:33:34 ↗ was. We gate, currently there's a gate at this location and there's a gate

1:33:39 ↗ at this location. So you have the ability to prevent any access to the rear

1:33:45 ↗ side of the building. This is currently the area of the grass play field and

1:33:51 ↗ track. So this is play area currently. The configuration changes, some of this becomes hard

1:33:57 ↗ surface area and this becomes sand surface play field. So there are recreational

1:34:03 ↗ opportunities that occur back here. And if there are activities

1:34:08 ↗ going on after school and weekends, there's the intended ability

1:34:14 ↗ to use some of the parking to provide access for

1:34:19 ↗ that. It's a community recreation facility. So that southwest corner

1:34:25 ↗ parking lot, will that be open for people to go

1:34:30 ↗ there on Saturday nights? Generally. These are not lighted fields, so

1:34:36 ↗ beyond the hours of use that are either scheduled by the district or the city

1:34:42 ↗ for the use of fields. I'm not worried about the fields. I'm thinking about what

1:34:48 ↗ the one gentleman said about-- No, after dark, they get gated off. OK. Just to

1:34:53 ↗ follow that up, when you say gated off, are they gates designed to prevent vehicles

1:34:59 ↗ from going in there, or would they also be-- deterrent for pedestrians

1:35:05 ↗ to go in there and congregate? Currently we have vehicle gates in

1:35:11 ↗ these locations that don't necessarily prevent pedestrian travel. There are, it's certainly

1:35:16 ↗ possible that you can, there's actually currently a fence gate at this

1:35:22 ↗ point, so that would prevent, you know, it's a six foot fence.

1:35:27 ↗ You could put a six foot fence in on the other side

1:35:33 ↗ to prevent people from walking in if if that was desired. One

1:35:39 ↗ more quick one. Sure. Just off the list here that the speakers. Just

1:35:45 ↗ the question about the smaller bus access and drop off and how that

1:35:51 ↗ works. Yeah. Smaller bus drop off is planned to be on the cul-de-sac

1:35:57 ↗ loop. Thank you. Commissioner Allen. Thank you Mr. Chairman. Sir,

1:36:03 ↗ can you speak a little bit towards the fact about the long-term planning for Clark?

1:36:08 ↗ I know Clark is located next to the new middle school right now, and then

1:36:14 ↗ they're moving in here. And then eventually, what is going to happen to Clark Elementary

1:36:20 ↗ School? The existing Clark Elementary will be demolished when occupancy is-- moved into this

1:36:26 ↗ new facility. The area that's currently occupied by Clark and the Tiger Mountain Portables

1:36:32 ↗ will become the football, soccer, lacrosse field and track that serves the middle school

1:36:37 ↗ and the community as well as the softball field and finish up some of

1:36:43 ↗ the additional parking and exiting of the bus loop. So this will be the

1:36:49 ↗ permanent Clark Elementary School building? This will be the permanent new Clark.

1:36:56 ↗ How about for building 200? What's there right now? And what is the future

1:37:02 ↗ planning of that? This is a two-story building. It was built in the mid

1:37:08 ↗ '90s, so it's relatively recent. It's relatively new and in good condition. It was

1:37:14 ↗ built well. It's well insulated and fairly efficient. It's a two-story building with

1:37:20 ↗ a roof. The likelihood of expanding upwards on that is really slim because of

1:37:25 ↗ the type of construction of the building. And we're proposing enclosure of the hard

1:37:31 ↗ surface courtyard area to provide a commons to facilitate the use of this for

1:37:37 ↗ the Gibson Eck. For what? It's called Gibson Eck. It's named after the first

1:37:43 ↗ two graduates from Iskwa High and two ladies, Gibson and Eck. And it

1:37:48 ↗ is a evolution of the Tiger Mountain Community High School. And-- OK,

1:37:54 ↗ yeah. So that's where it will be used then, huh? OK. The

1:38:00 ↗ turning radius-- I know we have a small site, and we're trying

1:38:06 ↗ to squeeze everything in there. But the turning radius for buses-- and

1:38:12 ↗ then you have the small van that's coming in.

1:38:18 ↗ Is that, I mean, somebody, this is a regular, probably looked at it and

1:38:24 ↗ said it's adequate. It seems pretty tight. This is a regular city standard cul-de-sac

1:38:30 ↗ that was developed, I don't know, maybe eight, ten years ago and currently is

1:38:36 ↗ and has been used for a number of years for the bus drop off. Currently

1:38:41 ↗ buses come in on First Avenue heading south, they come back around the bus loop,

1:38:47 ↗ and then they stack along the west side of the community center. And as a

1:38:52 ↗ middle school, they share the buses with the high schools. So there's currently between 22

1:38:57 ↗ and 24 buses that serve the middle school. And when Clark moves in here, Clark

1:39:03 ↗ has six buses. Maybe in the future, because this has a little bit bigger capacity,

1:39:08 ↗ it might grow to eight. But you're looking at six to eight buses compared to

1:39:13 ↗ 22 to 24. So the bus traffic and impacts there will be significantly reduced. So

1:39:18 ↗ you're saying that the buses, they're coming from the north end, coming down south here

1:39:23 ↗ this way? Correct. And it's not sharing with the parents' traffic coming in here? On

1:39:29 ↗ Front Street then? There's an occasional parent that tries to come back up the

1:39:35 ↗ wrong way, but for the most part, no. And the parent pick-up drop-off is

1:39:40 ↗ off of Front and Newport. Newport, which aligns with Clark, and comes in, comes

1:39:46 ↗ to the front, drops off, and exits right back around here. The bone pool

1:39:52 ↗ is right in this area. And so you never have this crossing of the

1:39:58 ↗ buses versus the parents' traffic then? No. There's a physical barrier here of about a

1:40:03 ↗ 10-foot grade separation and retaining wall in this location. It does taper up. The elevation

1:40:08 ↗ of this part of the bus loop is basically the same elevation as this, but

1:40:13 ↗ this is a raised table sidewalk crosswalk across here. And the buses go straight north

1:40:18 ↗ onto-- And then the buses exit-- To the east of the sitting pool. --back to

1:40:23 ↗ the north. and have the option of continuing out towards Sunset

1:40:29 ↗ or turning right or turning left, depending on the route destination.

1:40:34 ↗ Okay, good. Another question. Is there any reason why we're not

1:40:40 ↗ exiting utilizing the southeast corner of the lot for traffic? Well,

1:40:46 ↗ there's a wetland in this extreme corner here, and this is

1:40:51 ↗ the... The Rainier Trail. The Rainier Trail runs right through here. And then there's an

1:40:57 ↗ extended wetland along the east side of the trail, the old railroad bed in this

1:41:02 ↗ area here. And where's the limit of the wetland? Does it cover all the way

1:41:08 ↗ through here? The extent of the wetland that covers into the school property is this

1:41:13 ↗ corner right down here. And it extends further out to the south and west. And

1:41:19 ↗ I think that's probably about the configuration of that area there because the concrete trail

1:41:24 ↗ comes right through here. And then there's another long, skinny piece of wetland that's on

1:41:29 ↗ the east side of the trail. So there's a number of issues of crossing here.

1:41:35 ↗ A number of years ago when we built this reconfigured the front bus loop here,

1:41:41 ↗ we looked at trying to bring an exit drive down here and connect through here.

1:41:46 ↗ And that got all tangled up in the fact that we were crossing the creek

1:41:51 ↗ and we couldn't do that. And so that basically got squashed. There's a pedestrian crossing

1:41:56 ↗ across that creek currently, but not for roadway access. And how long ago was that?

1:42:02 ↗ That eight to 10 year time frame. Because it seems to me, you know, we're

1:42:07 ↗ all, you know, we have a very small site and here we are trying to

1:42:12 ↗ put in two driveways, one of which, you know, the neighbors, you know, I sure

1:42:17 ↗ don't want to be living somewhere on the west side, but you got two driveways

1:42:22 ↗ that you're trying to squeeze in there and somehow If you could just minimize that

1:42:28 ↗ and have an exit towards the east side of the property, seems like

1:42:34 ↗ that's something worthwhile to look into. CHRIS RODGERS: Yeah, one of the primary

1:42:39 ↗ concerns we have is the separation of the parent pickup drop-off traffic and

1:42:45 ↗ school buses. When they conflict, it becomes really problematic. OK. And

1:42:51 ↗ the portables are coming from existing Clark property, is that

1:42:56 ↗ correct? All the portable classrooms? Portables will come from the

1:43:02 ↗ existing Tiger Mountain campus when it comes apart or comes

1:43:07 ↗ down in June of '17. And the reason why we're

1:43:13 ↗ still using portables, seems to me portables are portables. Is

1:43:19 ↗ it because of financial budget that we cannot build those classrooms and we're

1:43:25 ↗ still using portables? Well, we use portables to try and manage and bridge

1:43:30 ↗ growth. The district currently has 200 portable classrooms in the proposed bond with

1:43:36 ↗ a new high school, middle school, two new elementary schools and additions that

1:43:42 ↗ will add about 200 classrooms to the inventory. If we never saw

1:43:48 ↗ another student, we can get rid of all the portables and put everybody

1:43:54 ↗ in schools. But to build that number of additional schools is probably impossible,

1:44:00 ↗ both financially and just physically, because there isn't land area available to do

1:44:05 ↗ it. So we use portables. In the past, portables were probably more temporary

1:44:11 ↗ than they have been in more recent years, but growth is 500

1:44:17 ↗ to 600 kids a year. And when they come, you have to have a seat

1:44:23 ↗ for them. And portables come in quicker and at a lot less cost than a

1:44:29 ↗ permanent building. CHRIS JERRAM: Yeah, that's all that I have, Mr. Chairman. Thank you. CHRIS

1:44:35 ↗ JERRAM: I don't have a lot to add because it's been gone over pretty well.

1:44:41 ↗ I really appreciate what the public had to say. I like this idea of possible

1:44:47 ↗ win-win. of doing some additional landscaping that could be a great amenity to

1:44:53 ↗ the users of the property and potentially build that buffer up to help

1:44:59 ↗ the folks that are living close by for their quality of life. So

1:45:04 ↗ I think that's something that should be explored. Really good idea that was

1:45:10 ↗ brought up by another commissioner. - Thank you. Commissioner Morgan. - The current

1:45:16 ↗ building height that we have, is it 32 feet? The

1:45:22 ↗ Gibson Act here is 32 feet. I think the east side of the existing gym

1:45:27 ↗ building is more like 42 feet from the east side. It's lower on the west

1:45:33 ↗ side. Okay. I guess what I'm trying to understand, and, Amy, this may be a

1:45:39 ↗ question for you, is the building height nonconformity or is that going to be a

1:45:44 ↗ variance request because the nonconformity We're going up to looks like 47 feet for

1:45:50 ↗ building height, which exceeds allowed 30. They didn't see something saying we're already at

1:45:56 ↗ 47. And can you make a nonconforming situation worse or do we have to

1:46:02 ↗ go through a variance to get it? So basically the the the code currently

1:46:07 ↗ allows them or allows any development to expand and increase the nonconformity in

1:46:13 ↗ the community facilities zone. So if you were a foot over, if you

1:46:19 ↗ were at 31 feet, you could go to 80 feet or 90 feet,

1:46:25 ↗ whatever you wanted to? Yeah, basically the code is silent on how high

1:46:31 ↗ you can go. It seems like a strange... situation you can

1:46:36 ↗ make nonconforming even worse instead of just maintaining it. For the

1:46:42 ↗ community facilities, though. So building heights is one of those conundrums

1:46:48 ↗ because we go to three stories to reduce footprint area, which

1:46:53 ↗ reduces site impacts and compacts the building. The third story of

1:46:59 ↗ this building basically occupies this area and I imagine adding that

1:47:05 ↗ much more floor space somewhere else on this site. Yeah, I'm not trying to say

1:47:11 ↗ I think the building's too tall in relation to surroundings or anything like that. It's

1:47:17 ↗ just more of a code question and how it actually works in terms of how

1:47:23 ↗ it gets approved. On First Avenue South, is there not a sidewalk now between the

1:47:29 ↗ school and Southeast Bush Street? There's a sidewalk all along the east side here.

1:47:35 ↗ It goes the sidewalk all the way adjacent to the community

1:47:41 ↗ center to Bush Street? Correct. Okay, great. I'm going to offer,

1:47:47 ↗ can I get out for, because I have one of my

1:47:53 ↗ existing photos shows you, so here is what First Avenue looks

1:47:59 ↗ like. There's no official sidewalk on the left side and on the

1:48:04 ↗ right side pretty much it's flush to the to the roadway. You could he

1:48:10 ↗ is yeah that was that when I was looking at your package Amy your

1:48:16 ↗ pedestrian connection concerns there but we they can walk on the east side of

1:48:22 ↗ the street along the community center on a sidewalk. So

1:48:27 ↗ I think this is-- There's a sidewalk that runs the whole way. Yeah, and

1:48:33 ↗ I think this is where Ms. Lynch was talking about how cars will park

1:48:39 ↗ there and block what is intended as the pedestrian access. They can park on

1:48:45 ↗ the sidewalk? Well, because it's not raced, so people just kind of take over

1:48:51 ↗ whatever space there is. I'm sorry, so it's not a raised

1:48:56 ↗ sidewalk? Yeah, it's delineated more by this, more like this, you know, like

1:49:02 ↗ a lighter shade of pavement. Sounds like street to me. Light street. We

1:49:08 ↗ have a lot of places in the city that kind of has that

1:49:14 ↗ flush to the... Right. Okay. So is one possibility to put in

1:49:19 ↗ at least a curb? Extruded curb, yeah. Prevent that so that we do have

1:49:25 ↗ student walkability to Bush? And to clearly delineate where people can walk versus where

1:49:31 ↗ cars are parking. Exactly. OK. And then

1:49:37 ↗ the overflow parking is just, as you said, I think just at

1:49:43 ↗ certain events you can open those gates and bring cars in. At

1:49:49 ↗ certain events you can park cars on the hard surface play area

1:49:55 ↗ just to help absorb people for those events. OK, great. And Amy,

1:50:01 ↗ maybe you could bring this up. I guess I have some questions

1:50:06 ↗ about the west side of Clark. Well, both

1:50:12 ↗ the elevation and then actually where the students

1:50:17 ↗ that get dropped off will go into the

1:50:23 ↗ building and come out of the building. OK,

1:50:29 ↗ students that get picked up-- And if you

1:50:34 ↗ could blow that up a bit, it'd be

1:50:40 ↗ really helpful. Or if you have a bigger--

1:50:45 ↗ Oh, that happened. Hmm, nope. OK, let me

1:50:51 ↗ find here. There. So access points to

1:50:57 ↗ the building are on the south end here and at the midpoint and

1:51:02 ↗ also at this point on both sides of the building and south endpoint.

1:51:08 ↗ So pick up/drop off is intended to be here. Typical program and operations of the

1:51:14 ↗ elementary school, kids get dropped off, they go into the hard surface play area, they

1:51:20 ↗ tend to congregate in the covered play areas if it's a rainy day, and then

1:51:25 ↗ at the time a few minutes before the school bell, they open the doors and

1:51:31 ↗ then the kids go into the building.

1:51:38 ↗ Great. And then, Amy, can you do me a favor?

1:51:43 ↗ Can you pull up your elevation views, the view from

1:51:49 ↗ the west? I think you have it, right? I think

1:51:55 ↗ they have more of a, let me see if maybe

1:52:00 ↗ this is, which side? The view from the west? There

1:52:06 ↗ we go. So if I had this right, so the

1:52:12 ↗ So that's the southern half of Clark. And then to the left of

1:52:18 ↗ that would be Building 100? This is the existing commons building here. Right.

1:52:23 ↗ OK. This is the walled service yard and loading dock and drop off.

1:52:29 ↗ So there's access into the building there on the north end. And then

1:52:35 ↗ there's south end access into the building. So there's, in essence, the--

1:52:40 ↗ accessibility on both ends. - And again, you said in the middle there, there's where

1:52:45 ↗ we can't really see the door, it's sort of-- - This is a stairway that

1:52:50 ↗ links the floors, the entrance points are here on the north side. - Right there,

1:52:55 ↗ okay, yeah. - It goes all the way through and then on the south end,

1:52:59 ↗ the stairwell. - So trying to figure out with this angle, you can't see that

1:53:04 ↗ one door, so. - Right. - Okay, thank you. - Most of the questions that

1:53:09 ↗ I had have already been asked, so I won't go over them again, but there

1:53:13 ↗ was, the amount of parking, how much of an

1:53:19 ↗ opportunity is there from ISD's perspective to reduce the

1:53:25 ↗ parking in order to increase the pervious surface? -

1:53:31 ↗ That's certainly something that we'll look at. - Okay,

1:53:37 ↗ is 12% kind of a? over the limit.

1:53:42 ↗ I mean, we're pretty flexible historically, but for

1:53:48 ↗ that topic, that's a pretty good jump.

1:53:55 ↗ There was a statement made that the city codes don't allow pervious pavement. Did

1:54:01 ↗ I understand that correctly? No, they do allow it. They don't count as pervious

1:54:07 ↗ surface. For zoning and development standards purposes, pervious pavers are not. Right. You can

1:54:12 ↗ do it, but you just don't get credit for it. Right. Is there a

1:54:18 ↗ particular rationale for that? Our zoning standard is meant to mitigate not only

1:54:24 ↗ the stormwater. So most of the previous pavement is meant to meet

1:54:30 ↗ the stormwater requirements. But in terms of the quality of the environment,

1:54:36 ↗ including heat island, it doesn't really do much for that. So that's

1:54:41 ↗ why, you know, the development standards were meant to mitigate and allow for

1:54:47 ↗ more of the areas for planting and more for the quality of the environment,

1:54:53 ↗ not just stormwater. - Okay, I think that that is it in terms of

1:54:59 ↗ questions that I had that have already been, so I'm not gonna go over

1:55:05 ↗ them in the interest of. - I had just one more question I wanted

1:55:11 ↗ to. Ms. Craven asked a question, and if you didn't know, I

1:55:17 ↗ thought your quotes were appropriate for today since today is Dr. Seuss's birthday, right? Yeah.

1:55:22 ↗ That's pretty good. Nicely done. We're serving green eggs after the meeting, if there's any

1:55:28 ↗ way. Is that we have a high school that will be growing onto this

1:55:34 ↗ property as well and the question was about what are we doing to really encourage

1:55:40 ↗ non-motorized vehicle transportation to the school. We know the little guys aren't going to be

1:55:46 ↗ driving cars but the high schoolers may so what's the school district's program to try

1:55:52 ↗ to get kids out of their cars and into public transit or on a bike

1:55:57 ↗ or on their feet. CHRIS RODGERS: And if I can interrupt here to add to

1:56:02 ↗ Commissioner Brennan's concerns, I would also say that the number, as you've heard me say

1:56:07 ↗ before, and we've expressed this before when it came to the high school, the number

1:56:11 ↗ of parents, whether it's dropping off at the high school or dropping off at the

1:56:17 ↗ elementary school, the percentage of parents that drive their children to school and pick them

1:56:22 ↗ up seems to me to be quite surprising considering the environmental ethos of this area.

1:56:27 ↗ So I would very much like to know the answer to that question because it

1:56:32 ↗ seems that there's a tremendous opportunity there. Well, we transport

1:56:38 ↗ about half of the kids in the district to and from school on

1:56:44 ↗ the yellow buses. So it's a good start. It'd be nice if more

1:56:50 ↗ rode the bus. It's a trend that parent pickup drop-off has increased over

1:56:56 ↗ the years. Probably somewhat safety security related, also somewhat related to the fact

1:57:02 ↗ that kids are doing more extracurricular activities. They go into

1:57:08 ↗ all sorts of different events and service providers for either sports

1:57:13 ↗ and recreation or other educational issues. So we try. The Gibson-Eck

1:57:19 ↗ is planned to max out at about 250, and that's going

1:57:25 ↗ to take a few years to get there. So a fourth

1:57:30 ↗ of that class would be seniors and a few juniors. So,

1:57:36 ↗ not a large number. The other interesting piece about the GIPS and EC is

1:57:42 ↗ that the program is designed to strongly interact with local community businesses for internships

1:57:48 ↗ and that students would be at school Monday, Wednesdays and Fridays and they would

1:57:54 ↗ be at their internships on Tuesdays and Thursdays. So it's going to significantly

1:58:00 ↗ change the traffic impacts and traffic patterns during the week. But the numbers of

1:58:06 ↗ parking spaces that we've planned for accounts for the fact that we anticipate that

1:58:11 ↗ Gibson-Eck will grow to about 250 kids and that the fourth of those would

1:58:17 ↗ be seniors. Probably a good percentage, not much different than what the percentage of

1:58:23 ↗ seniors is at current high schools, would probably be drivers. We all

1:58:29 ↗ share a goal of getting people out of cars and using alternative

1:58:34 ↗ forms of transportation. One of the interesting things that came out of

1:58:40 ↗ the district and community and city meeting the other night was that

1:58:46 ↗ there are transportation plans and planning in the works. There's some hopefully

1:58:51 ↗ new things that will be happening. But in large part, we deal

1:58:57 ↗ with a suburban transportation system currently. There is no public transit. The

1:59:03 ↗ yellow buses provide the majority of public transportation in the region currently.

1:59:09 ↗ The Issaquah core area development is a 10, 20, 30-year plan, and our need

1:59:14 ↗ is immediate. We're going to face challenges to provide school facilities for the kids

1:59:20 ↗ that are here now and that come next year and the year after that

1:59:26 ↗ and the year after that. I think that there are opportunities in the future

1:59:32 ↗ As the city develops and there becomes a greater core area population, that

1:59:38 ↗ some of the areas that we currently use for vehicular transportation could be

1:59:44 ↗ converted to additional open space, green space, play fields, park space. as we

1:59:50 ↗ look at additional planning down the road. But reality is we really

1:59:55 ↗ have to provide for the circumstances that exist today and do what

2:00:01 ↗ we can to try and minimize We have one contingent, the parent contingent

2:00:06 ↗ is sort of of the mind frame that their kid has a given right to

2:00:12 ↗ a parking space at school and we should have a thousand parking spaces at Issaquah

2:00:17 ↗ High instead of 400 but we don't. So we do impose some limits and they

2:00:23 ↗ have to deal with it and not every kid can get a parking pass.

2:00:29 ↗ Corollary to that is if you don't provide some reasonable number of parking spaces on

2:00:34 ↗ site, then they migrate out into the community and that creates other issues and concerns.

2:00:40 ↗ So difficult issue. I guess that whole issue is an interesting one, but it seems

2:00:46 ↗ like especially in this case when you're exceeding the number of spaces that you need,

2:00:52 ↗ you're almost facilitating the use of a car as opposed to limiting the number of

2:00:56 ↗ spaces and making it somewhat competitive to get a parking space. I know the kids

2:01:01 ↗ would move off. I did when I was a kid and had my car. And

2:01:06 ↗ you get a few tickets and you try to explain that to your dad, and

2:01:11 ↗ pretty soon you start taking the bus. I guess that's old school. The price

2:01:16 ↗ of the parking space continues to go up too. So that's another disincentive.

2:01:22 ↗ But it seems like most of the kids are able to manage. Are

2:01:28 ↗ there any more questions, requests for clarifications, or anything? All right.

2:01:34 ↗ I'm sorry, the public comment period has been closed. But if you do have something

2:01:40 ↗ that you'd like to bring up, I would invite you to communicate with the staff

2:01:45 ↗ specifically, because we'll see that for the next-- in our packet to prepare for the

2:01:51 ↗ next meeting. So don't think I'm trying to prevent you from communicating. Just if you

2:01:57 ↗ do it directly with Amy, it would be great. So we'll now

2:02:03 ↗ go to the part of the last part of the community conference where the

2:02:08 ↗ commissioners make their observations and or recommendations regarding the application. And we'll start with

2:02:14 ↗ Commissioner Higgs. I have two recommendations and one

2:02:20 ↗ is that ISD work with the walk and roll and

2:02:26 ↗ safe streets to try and work around these issues about

2:02:32 ↗ transportation and also increase the the area for bikes and

2:02:37 ↗ make some bike access available where it's visible so that parents

2:02:43 ↗ can see it and maybe think about biking with their kids

2:02:49 ↗ to school. And the other observation and recommendation that I have

2:02:55 ↗ is surrounding public comment. around what I'm hearing most from the

2:03:01 ↗ public is that they would like a preservation of their quality of life.

2:03:07 ↗ That's what I'm hearing loud and clear. And so in order to be

2:03:13 ↗ good neighbors, I think that ISD should really work to mitigate some of

2:03:19 ↗ these issues of the excavation, the screening. So my recommendation would be to

2:03:25 ↗ have a fence and also build a hedge around the southern

2:03:31 ↗ and southeast part of the property based on public comment from

2:03:36 ↗ Mr. Edgar Edger Roshelson. I think that that is a very good

2:03:42 ↗ solution. I see that around my own kids' elementary school, which works quite

2:03:48 ↗ well with the adjacent properties. And so we would probably want to look

2:03:53 ↗ into appropriate hedges, not just putting up any old hedge, but something that

2:03:59 ↗ would grow rapidly and that the root systems won't lift up because it

2:04:05 ↗ will be close to the parking lot. So that's not lifting

2:04:11 ↗ up and causing a problem for the parking lot. So possibly

2:04:16 ↗ laurels, that's a quick growing, very attractive hedge that has, from

2:04:22 ↗ what I know, a pretty solid root system and is inexpensive

2:04:28 ↗ to maintain. So I think the combination of you're shaking your head. It's not

2:04:34 ↗ inexpensive to maintain, but go ahead. Well, the reason why I said it's inexpensive

2:04:39 ↗ to maintain is because we won't be dealing with falling limbs. which could

2:04:45 ↗ be a little dangerous around there. And so that's why I'm suggesting laurels. They

2:04:51 ↗ grow quickly and hedge trimmers can take care of them and they don't have

2:04:57 ↗ the drop off. of the limbs that could be dangerous to homes

2:05:03 ↗ and windows as well. And also don't have the deep root systems

2:05:09 ↗ that can uplift the pavement. So those are my two recommendations.

2:05:14 ↗ Thank you. Mr. Schiller? Mine centered around the excess parking and the

2:05:20 ↗ variance going to be necessary for the impervious issue and the impact

2:05:26 ↗ in that southwest parking lot to the community of the south. So

2:05:32 ↗ just trying to think about how to move to create additional buffer

2:05:37 ↗ moving the south most part of the facility north. trying to create that.

2:05:43 ↗ So I guess one other concern was in that loop on the west side of

2:05:49 ↗ the property where the people are supposed to drive through, drop off kids, and drive

2:05:54 ↗ out, there's a parallel parking or perpendicular parking all along there. And I think that's

2:05:59 ↗ going to create a real serious traffic problem when people are parking as well as

2:06:04 ↗ pulling out and trying to get going. So I think you might want to look

2:06:10 ↗ at that. That's it. Similar concerns, so I'll just kind

2:06:16 ↗ of validate a couple here. One is just the south boundary and sensitivity to

2:06:22 ↗ the neighbors and finding a way in a combination of fencing, robust screening landscaping

2:06:27 ↗ and potentially reconfiguring particularly that parking area a bit to create a little bit

2:06:33 ↗ more of a buffer there. I think is something that the district and the

2:06:39 ↗ design team should look at. I think that will be something we'll be paying close

2:06:44 ↗ attention to when this comes back, if this comes back, unless it hands down a

2:06:50 ↗ different process. Again, really looking hard at LID opportunities, understanding some have been incorporated here,

2:06:55 ↗ but those that we can add to the property on site, even allowing the kids

2:07:01 ↗ to see them as they're on the property too. I think they're an educational thing

2:07:06 ↗ as well if they're done right. I think what we did, or what the district

2:07:12 ↗ did at the high school, I think was a good example of integrating a number

2:07:17 ↗ of different LID principles on the site and into the actually into the building even

2:07:22 ↗ did a green roof so I thought that was a great kind of leadership example

2:07:27 ↗ of the district kind of putting its green foot forward and maybe there's more that

2:07:32 ↗ could be done on this property as this opportunity presents itself so I'd like to

2:07:37 ↗ see that challenged a bit The perimeter landscaping, it seems thin to me around this

2:07:42 ↗ project, around the property, particularly on the south and on the west properties. And I

2:07:47 ↗ know over on the west side, it's fairly limited. We have a steep slope there.

2:07:51 ↗ So we've got some already a bit of a buffer that occurs to those properties

2:07:56 ↗ that slopes away. but on the property itself there's a fairly limited amount of landscaping

2:08:01 ↗ that's been provided and if there's any opportunity to enhance that i think that would

2:08:07 ↗ be good again it's part of the concern about um blair etc that could be

2:08:12 ↗ coming from the vehicles now that are planned to travel down through that portion of

2:08:18 ↗ the site so that would kind of both and then from a screening standpoint help

2:08:24 ↗ on that front. And I'm still a little puzzled by the process side and how

2:08:29 ↗ this moves forward and what the threshold triggers are for the height question and then

2:08:35 ↗ the impervious question and what triggers heading to a variance and to the hearing examiner

2:08:40 ↗ versus sticking with the commission. But I guess that'll be a staff call depending on

2:08:46 ↗ how the design advances from here. So those would be my comments. Thank you,

2:08:52 ↗ sir. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I'd like to thank the

2:08:58 ↗ the staff and the neighbors for coming down. It's really nice to see so many

2:09:02 ↗ neighbors that comes down who are concerned about the neighborhood. And being the front street

2:09:07 ↗ and the center city of Issaquah, there's a lot of things that's happening in that

2:09:12 ↗ area. So it's really nice to see you folks come over and express your concern.

2:09:17 ↗ And rightly so, those are concerns that you have voiced. Those are concerns that I

2:09:22 ↗ would have if I was leading that area. So thank you for spending your evening

2:09:28 ↗ coming down here. I guess looking at the site, there seems to be a

2:09:34 ↗ lot of concern on the west side of the property. And it seems like

2:09:39 ↗ there needs to be more work that needs to be done to kind of

2:09:45 ↗ push the facilities, the buildings, onto the west side to

2:09:51 ↗ continue the concerns the neighbor would have, the comfort and then the livelihood of the

2:09:56 ↗ folks in the city of Issaquah. And trying to get to that point, I guess

2:10:02 ↗ my recommendation is that to push those buildings to the west side and then allow

2:10:08 ↗ the east side of the building, east side of the lot to have the circulation,

2:10:13 ↗ whatever you might have. I know it gets to a point where How much do

2:10:19 ↗ you want to spend? We have the buildings that's existing. Do we want to tear

2:10:24 ↗ it all down and then start new? It goes back to the issue of cost.

2:10:29 ↗ So you don't want to keep tearing down every building when you come across issues

2:10:35 ↗ like that. But this is something that I think all the kids around in the

2:10:40 ↗ neighborhood, all the young families coming to Issaquah, they look at what schools are my

2:10:45 ↗ kids going to go to? And they see something like this, I guess it's okay,

2:10:50 ↗ but then there's so much that can be done here. I like the idea of

2:10:56 ↗ separating the parents, vehicles coming in, and then the buses. There's always the possibility of

2:11:01 ↗ accident, kids running into the wrong lane, you know, get hit, and nobody wants that

2:11:06 ↗ to happen. So in this case, I think the design was able to

2:11:12 ↗ do that. But I think that you can still improve that. I

2:11:18 ↗ guess I would ask the designer or the architect to look at

2:11:24 ↗ maybe pushing the driveway all the way to the west side and

2:11:29 ↗ the bus lane onto the west side and then the parent's vehicle

2:11:35 ↗ coming in and then exiting onto the north side of

2:11:41 ↗ the property. And then just so you don't have, right, just so you

2:11:47 ↗ don't have this too really, really long driveway when you have such a

2:11:52 ↗ tight site. And then you have all those portables that's taking up all

2:11:58 ↗ this valuable real estate when you can put them into a building, combine

2:12:04 ↗ them, I understand the fiscal, the financial issue here, and that's what we're all talking

2:12:09 ↗ about. But seems to me, you know, if we continue on this route of putting

2:12:14 ↗ the parents drop off on the west side of the building, eventually that's what's going

2:12:20 ↗ to be a permanent thing. And for the neighbors living in that area, it is

2:12:25 ↗ not an ideal situation. It is a very long driveway. and have to drop your

2:12:30 ↗ kid off, you have to drive all the way to the south end of the

2:12:34 ↗ property to turn around and to drop your kid off. A lot of parents would

2:12:38 ↗ just sit there in the corner, the northwest corner of the building and wait for

2:12:42 ↗ the kid to be dropped off and they turn around and then take off. So

2:12:46 ↗ what you created there is that you're going to create a lot of traffic standing

2:12:50 ↗ in that corner waiting for little Johnny to get off the the car so that

2:12:55 ↗ the parents don't have to sit and wait and drive all the way

2:13:01 ↗ to the south end of the property to drop off the kid. Same

2:13:07 ↗ thing with pickup. Parents would come in and sit in that corner waiting

2:13:13 ↗ for little John to come out. I understand and I know the point

2:13:19 ↗ that there are traffic monitors. They work well, but then a lot of

2:13:24 ↗ times, It does not work. And when you have emergency vehicles coming in and

2:13:30 ↗ you have all those string of cars sitting there waiting to come in or go

2:13:36 ↗ out, you just create a problem there. So I think the site needs to be

2:13:41 ↗ re-looked at. I hate to say this, being an architect myself, but there's a lot

2:13:46 ↗ of effort that went into it. And I would hate to have you re-look at

2:13:52 ↗ this. But I think in this case, you really need to look at this And

2:13:57 ↗ for the fact that Clark, you know, it's a great school. My kids

2:14:03 ↗ went to Clark. Great school, great school district. That's why we're here. But

2:14:09 ↗ there's a lot of things that needs to be done on here that

2:14:15 ↗ gives a better impression of the city of Issaquah. Again, I want to

2:14:21 ↗ repeat the fact that on the west side of the building, there's a

2:14:27 ↗ bottleneck there. It's nice you say there's a traffic

2:14:32 ↗ monitor. That's true. But the physical fact is that there

2:14:38 ↗ is a bottleneck there. The point was made by one

2:14:43 ↗ of the parents or retirees on the southwest corner. You

2:14:49 ↗ have a little area there where the kids can congregate

2:14:55 ↗ on Friday night or Saturday night. I shared a concern,

2:15:00 ↗ and I don't know I guess you can

2:15:06 ↗ push the parking lot there, push it closer to the

2:15:11 ↗ building to eliminate that problem. But there is a problem

2:15:17 ↗ there. Even with the fence, with the gate that's all

2:15:22 ↗ locked, you still have that problem. Utility vehicles, I know

2:15:28 ↗ that there's a service Again, the service vehicle that's coming in,

2:15:33 ↗ they would have to back into that service yard. And when they're all

2:15:39 ↗ done with it, they have to come all the way out again, going

2:15:45 ↗ all the way to the south end of the parking of the property,

2:15:50 ↗ turn around and go back out. It just seems like there's a lot

2:15:56 ↗ of wasted asphalt or concrete pavement there. So again, I would look at,

2:16:02 ↗ exiting the vehicle, creating an exit onto the east side

2:16:08 ↗ of the-- from the east side of the property. I

2:16:13 ↗ know there's some issues there. I don't know what solution

2:16:19 ↗ I can offer you, but it seems to me exiting

2:16:24 ↗ to the east side from the east side of the

2:16:30 ↗ property seems to be something that needs to be looked

2:16:36 ↗ at. Again, I'll just leave all the design work for the architect and don't

2:16:41 ↗ want to mess around with the architect. So that's all that I have, Mr. Chairman.

2:16:47 ↗ CHRIS JERRAM: Thank you. CHRIS JERRAM: Just three things. Buffer on the south side, I

2:16:53 ↗ think that really needs to be looked at. An idea might be to go over

2:16:58 ↗ and look at IVE on the south end of Issaquah Valley Elementary. CHRIS JERRAM: --is

2:17:04 ↗ some buffer and area where there's-- ELIZABETH BUTLER: That's where my kids go to school.

2:17:10 ↗ CHRIS JERRAM: --some hedges, and then there's a condo complex just adjacent, very similar. This,

2:17:15 ↗ I think another thing that needs to be looked at is footpaths and sidewalks. We

2:17:21 ↗ talked a little bit about that, the incomplete sidewalk in the bus turnaround area. And

2:17:26 ↗ then since we've all been beating to death the west side drop off, area, and

2:17:32 ↗ that is a very tight space. I've worked a lot of seven days fundraisers, parking

2:17:37 ↗ cars behind IMS in my day, because both my kids went to IMS. And I

2:17:43 ↗ know it might look good on paper, but that is a tight spot back there.

2:17:48 ↗ And that's something that needs to really be looked at, because I think it's going

2:17:53 ↗ to get to be a bottleneck, as Ray said. That's it for me. RAY SUAREZ:

2:17:59 ↗ Thank you, sir. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Let's see. First of all, thank you to

2:18:05 ↗ the public for coming in, providing your comments and all your thoughts and detailed thoughts.

2:18:10 ↗ We appreciate those very much. And thank you to the Issaquah School District for the

2:18:14 ↗ hard work they're doing, all for the benefit of the kids in Issaquah, which is

2:18:19 ↗ the most important part of all of this. I do want to say one thing

2:18:25 ↗ I do appreciate the architecture a lot of the modulation that we're seeing in the

2:18:30 ↗ buildings that are being planned and and some of the changes in in coloration between

2:18:35 ↗ the first floor and the second floor and so forth I think Amy pointed out

2:18:39 ↗ some nice design features in the buildings themselves and appreciate that and it'll be good

2:18:44 ↗ to see color boards at the SDP let's see so a few things I think

2:18:49 ↗ the Number one, a better delineation or an actual sidewalk for

2:18:55 ↗ students on Southeast First Avenue to get the bush. I think it may

2:19:01 ↗ be one thing for middle schoolers to make a walk along a street

2:19:07 ↗ that's just a painted sidewalk. But I think for grade schoolers to make

2:19:13 ↗ it safe for them to walk, we really need to have a decent

2:19:19 ↗ sidewalk to make it walkable. the south parking

2:19:25 ↗ lot. And I know this has already been covered, but

2:19:30 ↗ a couple of things I would recommend specifically would be

2:19:35 ↗ that the play field-- right now the play field, the

2:19:41 ↗ south border of the play field-- and Amy, could you

2:19:46 ↗ pull this up? Is that OK? Is that all right,

2:19:52 ↗ Mr. Chair? Sure. If you can pull up-- is it

2:19:57 ↗ possible to pull up A1.1, the site plan? Will this

2:20:03 ↗ one work?

2:20:08 ↗ It's the same thing with just the

2:20:14 ↗ circulation. Yeah, maybe yours worked better. And

2:20:19 ↗ then if you can zoom in on

2:20:25 ↗ the southwest corner, the parking lot and

2:20:30 ↗ the play field. So let me try

2:20:35 ↗ something here to zoom in. Oops, sorry.

2:20:41 ↗ Not the right one. OK, what happened

2:20:46 ↗ to you? Usually zoom at the bottom

2:20:52 ↗ of the screen. Lower right corner, just drag that

2:20:57 ↗ icon. Yeah, there's a measurement thing over there. It says 77%. What project is

2:21:03 ↗ this? So this is not the right slide. So I have to go back

2:21:09 ↗ to your-- This one, look at the circulation. Which one? This one. Yeah. But

2:21:15 ↗ this isn't the right one. I guess I can use this. Put that back

2:21:21 ↗ to the other slides you had before. Yeah. So here's what I can do.

2:21:27 ↗ It's not showing. OK. Let's try that

2:21:33 ↗ again. So I guess this one, we can't zoom

2:21:39 ↗ in. OK. So I guess what I'll point out

2:21:44 ↗ is the bottom portion of the play field, we

2:21:50 ↗ can see where it angles down to the left.

2:21:56 ↗ So the upper right portion of that, the upper right corner-- not there, but

2:22:02 ↗ right down there-- that about lines up with a 30-foot building setback. And I

2:22:08 ↗ know there's no building there, but it doesn't seem to me that it's necessary

2:22:14 ↗ for that play field to extend down closer to the property line there. I

2:22:19 ↗ would suggest the play field be pulled back to-- a minimum of 30 feet

2:22:25 ↗ from the property line that then allows room to put a solid hedge in there.

2:22:31 ↗ It was brought up by Essie and it was brought up by a homeowner that

2:22:36 ↗ a perfect place to plant a hedge. And then I would say on the south

2:22:41 ↗ end of the parking lot, there are 10 stalls right there that all cars would

2:22:47 ↗ be pointing straight into the condos. I would suggest that all of those stalls be

2:22:52 ↗ taken out And again, that parking area, the pavement moved back at least 30

2:22:58 ↗ feet from the edge. So you could have one continuous row of hedge all the

2:23:04 ↗ way along that south property border with a 30 foot width there. We lose only

2:23:10 ↗ 10 parking stalls. And you don't have any cars then that are pointing in towards

2:23:15 ↗ the condos when they're parking. And there's also one other thing, and I'm not

2:23:21 ↗ sure exactly where it is, but there's an 18-inch cedar at that southwest corner shown

2:23:26 ↗ on the existing site plan. And I think it would be great to-- if we

2:23:32 ↗ need the pervious area and we're trying to move that, create a better border with

2:23:37 ↗ the condo owners, it would be great to maintain that 18-inch cedar at the same

2:23:43 ↗ time. So those are my recommendations for that south parking lot and

2:23:48 ↗ hopefully creating a better border with the condos to the south. And I would hopefully

2:23:54 ↗ recommend-- I hope the condo owners have maybe a homeowner association president or somebody that

2:24:00 ↗ can represent them dealing with the school district to work on what that hedge would

2:24:06 ↗ be made of. Let's see, also on the west side of the building, both the

2:24:12 ↗ existing building right now, which the west side of that is really just on a

2:24:16 ↗ driveway that nobody really uses. But now we're going to be putting really a lot

2:24:21 ↗ of the parents are going to be driving by the west side. And both the

2:24:26 ↗ existing building and then a good portion of the new building have blank walls. And

2:24:30 ↗ Amy, I know in your report, you brought up the issue. I think those two

2:24:35 ↗ walls will be really critical for the appearance of these buildings because we don't want

2:24:41 ↗ parents driving by just blank brick walls every day. I think it's a perfect

2:24:46 ↗ opportunity to put some art into the architecture and create something that's going to

2:24:52 ↗ be interesting in the building, fun for the students, fun for the parents, a

2:24:58 ↗ great canvas for the school district and the architect to work together on.

2:25:04 ↗ And then my last comment is, Christopher, I sure hope that we get to see

2:25:08 ↗ any signage in front of the development commission. Because this will be an important sign

2:25:12 ↗ that a lot of people are going to drive by. So if there's a chance

2:25:16 ↗ for us to opine on any new signage, we'd love to do so, I think.

2:25:21 ↗ Thank you very much. CHRIS JERRAM: Thank you, Commissioner. We're going to deviate from the

2:25:25 ↗ norm a little bit here. The representatives of the city staff, Amy and Christopher, I'm

2:25:30 ↗ going to give them the opportunity now to directly answer some of the questions that

2:25:35 ↗ were raised by members of the public. So go ahead, Christopher, go ahead and do

2:25:40 ↗ that. Actually, I wanted to address some comments made by the commission. That's fine. And

2:25:45 ↗ they're having to do with process. And I almost made it through this whole meeting

2:25:50 ↗ without having to say anything. Almost. But with regard to process, the expansion of the

2:25:55 ↗ nonconformity for height, there are several criteria in the code that need to be met

2:26:01 ↗ in order to do that. And those criteria have to do with impacts to adjacent

2:26:06 ↗ properties and public benefit. So like I said, there's several criteria. And in our staff

2:26:12 ↗ report for the site development permit, we'll have to show how each of those criteria

2:26:17 ↗ are being met. Great. But I also wanted to point out a possible

2:26:23 ↗ scenario with regard to the next steps, which are if the school district does want

2:26:29 ↗ to apply for a variance to increase the impervious, because again they can't use that

2:26:34 ↗ expansion of a nonconformity with regard to impervious. They will have to apply for a

2:26:39 ↗ variance right now if they want to go over that 50%. And if they did,

2:26:43 ↗ a likely scenario would be that the variance would be kind of be bundled with

2:26:48 ↗ the site development permit and it would all go to the hearing examiner for a

2:26:52 ↗ decision. So if they apply for a variance, it's possible you guys will not

2:26:58 ↗ have another chance to review and comment. And the hearing examiner would be the decision

2:27:04 ↗ maker on the project. How often does that happen? It's happened a couple of times

2:27:10 ↗ in the last 25 years. They'd be the decider on all the whole SDP then?

2:27:16 ↗ So what Christopher is referring to is in the code there is a section that

2:27:21 ↗ talks about consolidated review and basically when you have multiple types of reviews for the

2:27:27 ↗ same project it gets elevated to the highest level of review. So in this case

2:27:32 ↗ it would be a level four which is with the hearing examiner. OK. Just a

2:27:37 ↗ quick question. But in that case what we've done here tonight would be on the

2:27:42 ↗ record for the hearing examiner's consideration. Right. OK. And the

2:27:48 ↗ public would have -- The public has a right to attend the hearing examiner

2:27:54 ↗ meeting? Yeah. Part of this is that we can only have one public hearing

2:28:00 ↗ for a project. And so what the hearing examiner would hold would be a

2:28:06 ↗ public hearing which would have the same opportunity of public comment as if it

2:28:12 ↗ was coming here. Anything else, Christopher? Not for me, no. Thank you.

2:28:18 ↗ I believe that the school district-- I frequently point out to people in this that

2:28:23 ↗ there's a process that just because you got there first doesn't mean that whoever has

2:28:28 ↗ the property next to you doesn't get to comply with city code and zoning and

2:28:33 ↗ things to do whatever they want to do with it, as long as it is

2:28:38 ↗ absolutely compliant and impact fees are met and so on and so forth. But I

2:28:44 ↗ believe that this is one of those instances where the applicant has an obligation

2:28:50 ↗ to the neighbors, to the property owner, the adjacent property owners, to address the

2:28:56 ↗ concerns that were expressed here tonight. shall we say, undesirable for this excellent

2:29:02 ↗ needed project. There's no question in my mind about the need for the Issaquah School

2:29:07 ↗ District to accommodate growth. It's absolutely not the issue. But I believe that there is

2:29:13 ↗ an unusual obligation because of the proximity and because of the number of vehicles, the

2:29:19 ↗ construction schedule, and so on, there is an elevated responsibility on the part of the

2:29:25 ↗ applicant and the city staff to address the concerns that were expressed

2:29:31 ↗ here tonight by the adjacent property owners. I believe that those concerns are absolutely legitimate.

2:29:37 ↗ When it comes to security, I would suggest that in the Southwest parking lot, as

2:29:43 ↗ well as every other area inside the city limits, it is the responsibility of the

2:29:49 ↗ Issaquah Police Department to ensure that crimes that are being committed or the potential for

2:29:55 ↗ crimes being committed are addressed by the Issaquah Police Department. The Issaquah Police Department

2:30:01 ↗ can only do that if they are informed of concerns by

2:30:06 ↗ the neighbors. So ultimately-- The IPD says this in all their public hearings and interviews

2:30:11 ↗ and so on. It's really up to the people that have the concerns to get

2:30:16 ↗ them to the police department and say, this is going on and it's got to

2:30:22 ↗ be addressed. So I think it's a legitimate concern to look at that as an

2:30:27 ↗ opportunity for Saturday night beer drinking and God knows what else. Absolutely. But it's really

2:30:32 ↗ going to be up to the property owners that if and when you see that,

2:30:37 ↗ to make sure that there is a clear presentation made to the city,

2:30:43 ↗ the elected staff, and the police department to address it. The landscaping plan,

2:30:49 ↗ obviously, we talked about the screen down there to protect the neighbors to

2:30:55 ↗ the degree possible from light and sound pollution. But I also wanted

2:31:00 ↗ to add to Commissioner Morgan's observation that on the elevations, I

2:31:06 ↗ know we don't have a final landscaping plan here. But I

2:31:11 ↗ do also think that there's an opportunity there for the elevations

2:31:17 ↗ that are mostly walls now to be used creatively, both for

2:31:22 ↗ aesthetic purposes and also just to soften the--

2:31:28 ↗ the presence of what are now presented to us

2:31:33 ↗ here at this stage in the game is blank

2:31:39 ↗ walls. So I think there's some real good opportunities

2:31:44 ↗ there. Excuse me. Everybody addressed it. I hesitate to

2:31:49 ↗ make a negative observation without being able to offer

2:31:55 ↗ a positive, realistic suggestion. But I am really concerned

2:32:00 ↗ about the parent pick up and drop off approach. I

2:32:06 ↗ understand the physical constraints, the fiscal constraints, and the realities of

2:32:12 ↗ parents who are late and are going to drop their kids

2:32:18 ↗ off wherever they can. But Commissioner Morgan also noted the perpendicular

2:32:23 ↗ parking there. And if it weren't for the perpendicular parking, I'd

2:32:29 ↗ still have concerns. But for perpendicular parking, to be added to

2:32:35 ↗ that uh traffic design aside from the bumper you know the the

2:32:41 ↗ bumper benders people coming out at the same time it's i don't

2:32:46 ↗ see any alternative to increased congestion being caused by the the ability

2:32:52 ↗ of people to use the parking places even if they're not supposed

2:32:57 ↗ to so that that Eliminating the ones down there at the bottom is

2:33:03 ↗ a good start, but especially if you have the option of dropping parking places

2:33:09 ↗ in various aspects of the plan to meet the city required minimum, I would

2:33:14 ↗ really consider looking at that or recommend looking at that. In closing, I

2:33:20 ↗ believe that the package was great as always from the city staff. I appreciate the

2:33:26 ↗ preparation there. I also very much appreciate the ISD staff preparation for this, the planning

2:33:31 ↗ and the elevations that were given to us and the explanations that were given and

2:33:37 ↗ the time to address the concerns that have been raised by the public, which will

2:33:43 ↗ continue to require everybody's attention. But I also very much want, as my fellow commissioners

2:33:48 ↗ have done, to express my appreciation for the members of the public who've come in.

2:33:53 ↗ Basically, you're the reason that we're here. This is a public, and the subsequent is

2:33:59 ↗ a public hearing. It is a community conference. And if members of the community and

2:34:04 ↗ the public don't show up, then We can call it that, but it doesn't do

2:34:09 ↗ what it's intended to do. So on a weeknight, for you to come out and

2:34:14 ↗ take the time to prepare your presentations and then give them to us and sit

2:34:18 ↗ through this is greatly appreciated by all of us. And it will make this project

2:34:23 ↗ better, believe me. So with that, if there are no more comments, questions, candy-coated snacks,

2:34:28 ↗ we'll close this meeting tonight. So the meeting is adjourned. Thank you. Good job.

2:34:33 ↗ Nice job, Mr. Chair, as always. But I'll give you that always.

2:34:39 ↗ Yes.

Minutes for this meeting haven't been published yet. Council and committee minutes are approved at the next meeting and embedded as a consent-calendar attachment in that meeting's agenda packet — they will appear here once that next packet is processed.