Development Commission · Wednesday, October 2, 2019 · City Council Digest

1. CALL TO ORDER

Commission Membership

packet pp.3

Previously discussed: Development Commission · Apr 24, 2019 Development Commission · May 1, 2019 Development Commission · May 29, 2019 Development Commission · Jul 2, 2019

Open packet at p.3 ↗

Staff report:

Development Commission About Staff Liaison Created in 1983, this commission reviews all land Lucy Sloman, use actions requiring a Level 3 review. The Land Development Manager Commission further serves as an advisory board Email to the City Council on land use actions requiring council approval (Level 5 review). Regular Members 2020 – Melvin Morgan The appearance of fairness doctrine prohibits 2020 – Kevin Price Development Commission members and City 2022 – Michael Brennan Council members from discussing the merit of 2022 – Richard Sowa specific land use development applications outside 2022 – Richard Sanford of the formal public meeting process. Citizens, 2023 – Brooke Shore however, may discuss any issue with the City's 2023 – Ben Rush Development Services Department. Written comments are also welcome. Alternate Members 2020 – Mark Rigos Membership 2020 – Nischitha Venkatesh The…

Minutes of August 15, 2019

packet pp.5–8

Previously discussed: Development Commission · Apr 24, 2019 Development Commission · May 1, 2019 Development Commission · May 29, 2019 Development Commission · Jul 2, 2019

Open packet at p.5 ↗

Staff report:

APPROVAL OF MINUTES a) 08-15-19 Development Commission Minutes Page [0000]

Minutes of August 21, 2019

packet pp.9–14

Open packet at p.9 ↗

Staff report:

APPROVAL OF MINUTES b) 08-21-19 Development Commission Minutes Page [0000]

Minutes of September 25, 2019

packet pp.15

Open packet at p.15 ↗

Staff report:

APPROVAL OF MINUTES c) 09-25-2019 Development Commission Minutes Page [0000]

Site Development Permit for Evergreen Ford Lincoln Dealership - Quasi-judicial, SDP19-00001; AAS19-00005; LLA19-00003 1, Aug. 21, 2019, and Sep. 25, 2019)

Katie Cote, Planning Consultant · packet pp.17–476

Topics: Land Use

Previously discussed: Development Commission · Aug 21, 2019

Open packet at p.17 ↗

Staff report:

Development Services 1775 – 12th Ave. NW | P.O. Box 1307 Issaquah, WA 98027 425-837-3100

2954 segments .txt ↗

0:20 ↗ you

0:30 ↗ looks like we're on the art air so I'd

0:33 ↗ like to welcome everybody to the public

0:37 ↗ hearing for the site development permit

0:39 ↗ for Evergreen Ford Lincoln dealership

0:40 ↗ it's a continuation from September 25th

0:44 ↗ but it really is a continuation from May

0:47 ↗ 1st August 21st and September 25th so we

0:51 ↗ have some administrative things to do

0:52 ↗ first we have have to announce or say

0:56 ↗ who's unexcused we have to have to

0:59 ↗ mention a tenth people here ok we have

1:06 ↗ excuse members or members present Mike

1:09 ↗ Brennan is excused

1:11 ↗ Richard Sanford no Morgan Richard so

1:13 ↗ Kevin price Ben Rusch is not here but

1:16 ↗ he's excused

1:17 ↗ Brooke Shore and Arthur Schulte we have

1:20 ↗ two members that are not excused mark

1:23 ↗ Rios and the sheet of ANCA Tish

1:26 ↗ so in addition we have some minutes to

1:31 ↗ approve from meetings of August 15th

1:32 ↗ August 21st and September 25th so we

1:36 ↗ sent those minutes out earlier I'm going

1:38 ↗ to ask the commissioners if they have

1:40 ↗ any changes or Corrections made to those

1:41 ↗ minutes No hearing none then we will

1:47 ↗ just assume that those our minutes are

1:49 ↗ approved by unanimous consent and so I

1:52 ↗ thank you and so now Lucy I think it's

1:56 ↗ your turn

2:11 ↗ [Music]

2:13 ↗ so as a quasi-judicial public hearing I

2:18 ↗ want to take you through some questions

2:21 ↗ associated with that because the purpose

2:23 ↗ is that we are both fair and appear fair

2:27 ↗ and that necessitates both procedural

2:30 ↗ due process and substantive due process

2:32 ↗ procedural process includes the

2:35 ↗ processes that we use such as providing

2:39 ↗ notice and doing things on the record

2:41 ↗ substantive due process means that we

2:44 ↗ make decisions based on adopted

2:46 ↗ regulations so I would ask as many of

2:51 ↗ you are familiar if you would please

2:52 ↗ read through the questions and then I'll

2:54 ↗ ask you a question in return

3:20 ↗ has everyone finished reading the

3:22 ↗ questions how many of you answer no to

3:26 ↗ all the questions great and then the

3:31 ↗ second piece has to do with as I

3:33 ↗ mentioned that all our discussion of the

3:36 ↗ permit happens on the record ex parte

3:40 ↗ contacts would be email discussion etc

3:43 ↗ that has taken place off the record

3:46 ↗ outside of the chambers not being

3:48 ↗ recorded so I would ask if anyone has

3:51 ↗ had any ex parte communications no no

3:56 ↗ okay thank you

4:10 ↗ all right

4:18 ↗ okay good evening i'm katie Cody a

4:23 ↗ planning consultant with the City

4:26 ↗ Issaquah I can't hear me okay I'll try

4:28 ↗ again good evening i'm katie cody I'm a

4:31 ↗ planning consultant with the city of

4:32 ↗ Issaquah good to see you all again

4:35 ↗ tonight we are returning back to you

4:38 ↗ with some additional information we are

4:42 ↗ still talking about the Evergreen Ford

4:44 ↗ Lincoln project which is shown here this

4:48 ↗ is the vicinity it's located near the

4:51 ↗ lakeside industries quarry north of i90

4:56 ↗ the project site is zoned intensive

5:00 ↗ commercial and is surrounded by as I

5:03 ↗ mentioned a quarry operation and other

5:05 ↗ commercially zoned properties and I 90

5:10 ↗ the proposal is for a Ford and Lincoln

5:15 ↗ dealership combined dealership building

5:17 ↗ service facility parking and storage and

5:22 ↗ display for vehicles the building is

5:24 ↗ proposed to be three stories but maybe

5:27 ↗ up to four stories if an additional

5:29 ↗ level of structured parking is added the

5:33 ↗ site contains the segment of the North

5:36 ↗ Fork of Issaquah Creek and in addition

5:42 ↗ to being adjacent to a tributary to the

5:46 ↗ Creek that is known to have salmon and

5:50 ↗ other fish in it another building

5:53 ↗ proposed for the site down here is a

5:54 ↗ display pavilion that would be used to

5:58 ↗ provide frontage on to East Lake smouch

6:01 ↗ Parkway and as part of this proposal

6:05 ↗ there's an extensive storm water

6:08 ↗ detention facility buffer enhancements

6:11 ↗ and landscaping so in May we came to you

6:17 ↗ for the first time with this project we

6:19 ↗ discussed lots of different aspects of

6:23 ↗ the project you asked us for additional

6:26 ↗ information we returned and

6:28 ↗ to provide that additional information

6:31 ↗ to you we had worked with the applicant

6:36 ↗ the applicant made changes to

6:37 ↗ architecture site elements had done some

6:42 ↗ additional plant had planned some

6:44 ↗ additional plantings and the stream

6:45 ↗ buffer had worked on some sustainability

6:47 ↗ elements and had made progress on some

6:49 ↗ engineering topics having do with access

6:53 ↗ but at that meeting there was quite a

6:57 ↗ bit of public comment at and before the

6:59 ↗ meeting about this tributary located

7:02 ↗ south of the property on the wash dot

7:04 ↗ right-of-way there was a lot of public

7:07 ↗ comment about the nature of the waterway

7:11 ↗ whether it was a stream or a ditch that

7:13 ↗ it was known to have fish in it and at

7:16 ↗ that time you asked staff to go back and

7:21 ↗ gather additional information regarding

7:23 ↗ that waterway so we've done that we've

7:26 ↗ worked with the applicant to study the

7:29 ↗ waterway more we've come to the

7:34 ↗ conclusion that it's a ditch according

7:38 ↗ to the Issaquah municipal code

7:40 ↗ definitions of ditch and stream we'll

7:43 ↗ talk about that more in detail in a

7:45 ↗ little bit and because it's a ditch we

7:47 ↗ also recognize that because there are

7:50 ↗ fish there even though the critical

7:52 ↗ areas code doesn't apply to the ditch

7:54 ↗ doesn't require buffers there's still a

7:58 ↗ duty through SEPA to protect that fish

8:00 ↗ habitat and to make sure that the

8:03 ↗ project doesn't diminish that existing

8:06 ↗ fish habitat so really where we are now

8:09 ↗ is presenting information back to you on

8:13 ↗ the CEPA process that staff has gone

8:16 ↗ through the applicant has prepared

8:19 ↗ information about the water source which

8:22 ↗ helped us to answer the question of

8:24 ↗ stream or ditch and then the applicant

8:26 ↗ also prepared information about impacts

8:29 ↗ to the fish habitat in the ditch and

8:31 ↗ then we had our our city consultant peer

8:34 ↗ review that fish habitat memo in our

8:37 ↗ city staff has also peer reviewed the

8:39 ↗ water source memo

8:41 ↗ so we have since seep as a staff level

8:46 ↗ decision we've proposed a new SEPA

8:50 ↗ condition which I'll talk about at the

8:52 ↗ end of the presentations to address the

8:55 ↗ minor impacts that came from this the

8:59 ↗ fish habitat study and at this time

9:02 ↗ we're not proposing any changes to s DP

9:06 ↗ conditions that would have to do with

9:09 ↗ the code so this this explains sort of

9:13 ↗ the process that we went through at the

9:17 ↗ top of the questions is the question of

9:19 ↗ is it a ditch or stream we looked at the

9:23 ↗ definition of ditch and stream in the

9:25 ↗ code the the difference between a ditch

9:29 ↗ and stream boils down to the source of

9:31 ↗ water that that definition is unique to

9:35 ↗ Issaquah a lot of other jurisdictions

9:37 ↗ would define a stream differently but

9:40 ↗ this is how is the quad defines a stream

9:42 ↗ so the question was whether the water

9:44 ↗ source is natural or human generated

9:47 ↗ because it was found to be human

9:49 ↗ generated it it was defined as a ditch

9:53 ↗ and then again we went through this SEPA

9:57 ↗ process to come up with some mitigation

10:02 ↗ so I'm going to invite the applicant up

10:06 ↗ now and have them describe the two memos

10:09 ↗ that they have presented to you in their

10:11 ↗ process for doing that and then I'll

10:13 ↗ come back up and wrap up with the CEPA

10:16 ↗ discussion

10:23 ↗ I don't get you where you need to be try

10:32 ↗ to get this adjusted here I want to

10:35 ↗ thank everyone for coming out tonight

10:37 ↗ and for your time and efforts and energy

10:39 ↗ on this project I want to start by

10:41 ↗ giving a little bit of background yes

10:43 ↗ would you please introduce yourself oh

10:45 ↗ thank you very much

10:46 ↗ my name is Tyrell Bradley I'm the

10:47 ↗ project civil engineer and the

10:50 ↗ presentation that I'm going to be

10:52 ↗ talking about tonight is a group effort

10:55 ↗ by our wetland biologists and stream

10:59 ↗ biologists Mike Foster and Mark Garf our

11:03 ↗ Landscape Architect and so I will be

11:05 ↗ presenting this thank you I want to give

11:08 ↗ a little bit of background on the

11:10 ↗ information that was referenced in the

11:11 ↗ last design Commission meeting regarding

11:14 ↗ wash dots design reports and as you're

11:16 ↗ aware in 2016 and 2017 the State

11:19 ↗ Department of Transportation did a

11:21 ↗ stream relocation project of the North

11:23 ↗ Fork it'sso qua Creek and a tributary

11:26 ↗ that drained into the North Fork

11:27 ↗ Issaquah Creek d-o-t and that report

11:30 ↗ does does not reference this as a stream

11:33 ↗ of references as a tributary for several

11:36 ↗ reasons but the the focus of the study

11:40 ↗ was obviously increasing the upstream

11:43 ↗ habitat for the North Fork North Fork

11:45 ↗ Issaquah Creek as part of the public

11:50 ↗ process and the last design commission I

11:52 ↗ just wanted to refresh the remand back

11:55 ↗ to city staff and ultimately back to the

11:58 ↗ design team to go look at whether or not

12:00 ↗ this tributary is a ditch or a stream as

12:03 ↗ Katie mentioned I don't think we need to

12:07 ↗ look at this Katie just showed you so as

12:10 ↗ part of this project I feel like it's

12:13 ↗ good to kind of clarify what do T did

12:17 ↗ and what our project is proposing to do

12:19 ↗ just to sort of set the tone for the

12:21 ↗ conversation tonight so do t planted in

12:24 ↗ the lower area you can see the washed

12:25 ↗ out plantings to remain so on do T came

12:28 ↗ through here they did the proper

12:31 ↗ riparian replacement areas as they saw

12:34 ↗ fit for the

12:35 ↗ packs that were being done to this ditch

12:37 ↗ the mature vegetation is going to remain

12:40 ↗ on the will be screened north but it's

12:43 ↗ the east side of the washed out

12:44 ↗ plantings and then everything that's

12:46 ↗ shown in that little tan area is the

12:48 ↗ area that's on the Evergreen Ford

12:51 ↗ Lincoln property that is outside of the

12:54 ↗ washed out property so that's the area

12:55 ↗ that our our project can actually plant

12:58 ↗ within and that's the area that we're

12:59 ↗ going to be doing plantings to enhance

13:01 ↗ that riparian area so we were given two

13:07 ↗ tasks as Katie mentioned the first task

13:09 ↗ was to analyze the water source of this

13:13 ↗ ditch and determine whether or not it

13:14 ↗ was from man-made features like

13:16 ↗ stormwater runoff or whether it was

13:18 ↗ natural sources like spring fed runoff

13:20 ↗ based on that we are tasked with the

13:22 ↗ second item to determine whether our

13:25 ↗ project would directly or indirectly

13:27 ↗ impact they were pairing an area that

13:29 ↗ d-o-t planted when they did the stream

13:31 ↗ relocation project so I'm not going to

13:35 ↗ bore you with reading your municipal

13:38 ↗ code here but here is the the

13:40 ↗ definitions that we use to craft the

13:42 ↗ first letter and determine that it comes

13:44 ↗ down to the source of the waters as we

13:47 ↗ read through the publicly available

13:49 ↗ documents the d-o-t basis of design

13:52 ↗ report the Issaquah highlands report and

13:54 ↗ completing - site visits by Mike Foster

13:56 ↗ and myself we were able to determine

13:58 ↗ that there are two drainage basins that

14:00 ↗ contribute to this waters to this ditch

14:04 ↗ here is a very very high-level picture

14:07 ↗ and I'm gonna try not to get too much

14:08 ↗ into the weeds here but we have a

14:10 ↗ everything in the color on the left is

14:13 ↗ the Issaquah Highlands development now

14:15 ↗ in studying the d-o-t basis of design

14:18 ↗ report and confirming it with the

14:19 ↗ Issaquah Highlands stormwater study we

14:22 ↗ were able to determine the 75% of all

14:25 ↗ storm water that enters that ditch is

14:27 ↗ from the Issaquah Highlands development

14:29 ↗ the other twenty four and a half percent

14:32 ↗ is from the Cadman and lake side

14:35 ↗ stormwater ponds the washed out water

14:38 ↗ quality treatment pond and some

14:40 ↗ commercial areas just to the east of the

14:43 ↗ project site the project itself if we

14:47 ↗ in here I did a little excerpt and sort

14:51 ↗ of zoomed that in the project itself

14:52 ↗ contributes to less than 1/2 of 1% of

14:55 ↗ water that enters this ditch so a fairly

14:58 ↗ negligible impact on the total flow in

15:00 ↗ the ditch and these percentages are

15:02 ↗ based on the 100-year storm event so the

15:05 ↗ floodwater storm event if we zoom in and

15:09 ↗ look at excuse me the property itself I

15:12 ↗ have sort of a little bit hard to see

15:14 ↗ but I've have highlighted on the north

15:16 ↗ side of the screen here the main

15:20 ↗ contributor to this ditch is the

15:22 ↗ Issaquah highlands beehive great so

15:24 ↗ there's a bubble up structure along

15:26 ↗ 230th Street as you drive along you'll

15:28 ↗ notice it's a large bird cage as well a

15:31 ↗ lot of people reference it as that bird

15:33 ↗ cage is about 75% of the flow entering

15:36 ↗ this ditch the CAD man Saito I can

15:39 ↗ actually can I move the mouse there we

15:40 ↗ go so here's the bird cage right here

15:44 ↗ this outfall here takes all of the water

15:47 ↗ off of 230th pipes and discharges it to

15:50 ↗ the ditch we have a third discharge here

15:53 ↗ that comes from the Catman site and lake

15:55 ↗ side there's a fourth discharge I lost

15:58 ↗ my mouse there's a fourth discharge

16:00 ↗ point right here that comes from the two

16:01 ↗ adjacent commercial properties the last

16:04 ↗ point of discharge is from the

16:05 ↗ stormwater pond that is adjacent to the

16:08 ↗ highway from deity's stormwater wet pod

16:11 ↗ and then here is the entire ditch until

16:16 ↗ it goes underneath East Lake Sammamish

16:18 ↗ Parkway there was one area of concern

16:24 ↗ that was brought to our attention and it

16:25 ↗ is on the east side here as our project

16:30 ↗ sites down here and it was kind of to

16:33 ↗ the southeast and I blew up a section of

16:35 ↗ it there's two natural springs Camp

16:38 ↗ Creek and Clayton Creek and both of

16:40 ↗ these were brought to the attention of

16:41 ↗ the design team as we needed to make

16:43 ↗ sure that that didn't flow into the

16:45 ↗ project so Mike and I went out there and

16:48 ↗ conducted two site visits where we were

16:49 ↗ able to go track that these two creeks

16:52 ↗ are gathered into a wet pond they go

16:55 ↗ through an overflow to an infiltration

16:57 ↗ pond that has a beehive grate that

16:59 ↗ overflows down

17:00 ↗ a storm system that goes directly to the

17:03 ↗ East Fork of the Issaquah Creek so this

17:06 ↗ is not included in the North Fork

17:07 ↗ Issaquah Creek drainage basin so our

17:13 ↗ task one findings and conclusions are

17:15 ↗ that based on the review of all the

17:16 ↗ available information this Hyland's

17:18 ↗ report and our two site visits all of

17:21 ↗ the storm water entering this ditch is

17:23 ↗ 100% from manmade surface runoff so

17:28 ↗ based on the IMC definition this ditch

17:31 ↗ is a ditch and not a stream and the

17:34 ↗ ditch itself is a human built storm

17:35 ↗ water system I was referenced in the

17:37 ↗ d-o-t design report I would like to note

17:41 ↗ that there was a comment made about

17:43 ↗ groundwater and whether or not

17:44 ↗ groundwater would change the definition

17:47 ↗ of a ditch if groundwater leaked into

17:51 ↗ the ditch would that change it to a

17:52 ↗ stream and Greg Johnston with the

17:55 ↗ watershed company provided a response

17:57 ↗ back which sorry I'm introducing people

17:59 ↗ midstream here snuck that one in there

18:02 ↗ Greg Johnson is the watershed company

18:07 ↗ design support for the staff I don't

18:09 ↗ know if that's the right way to say that

18:11 ↗ he's the independent consultant for the

18:13 ↗ city of Issaquah so he said no it does

18:16 ↗ not change it and I would say that I I

18:20 ↗ investigated our geo engineer's report

18:22 ↗ that was prepared by our geotechnical

18:24 ↗ engineer and the boring closest to the

18:27 ↗ ditch has the water depth one foot below

18:29 ↗ at the bottom of the ditch and the study

18:31 ↗ that was recently completed in January

18:33 ↗ so it's not even a concern the water

18:38 ↗ tables below the ditch I will say so

18:41 ↗ moving on to task 2 we we were tasked

18:44 ↗ with trying to figure out okay so we

18:47 ↗ have a ditch is our project in any way

18:51 ↗ directly or indirectly impacting the

18:53 ↗ riparian areas that were planted by

18:55 ↗ d-o-t as part of this project we worked

18:59 ↗ with the city to determine that there

19:00 ↗ are four major areas of concern having

19:03 ↗ to do with riparian areas the first one

19:06 ↗ water quality functions pollutant

19:08 ↗ filtration and fine sediment control the

19:11 ↗ second being flood attenuation the

19:13 ↗ third shading function and the fourth

19:16 ↗ large woody debris recruitment I would

19:24 ↗ like to go through our stormwater system

19:26 ↗ before I go through these four points so

19:28 ↗ that you have an understanding of what

19:30 ↗ our on-site system is set up to do as

19:33 ↗ far as its discharged to the ditch so if

19:36 ↗ we start here on the left side of the

19:37 ↗ screen the project site storm water will

19:40 ↗ run off through a modular wetland system

19:43 ↗ which will provide our our treatment and

19:45 ↗ I would like to say that the Department

19:47 ↗ of Ecology has standards for water the

19:50 ↗ discharges either directly or indirectly

19:51 ↗ to a stream and we recognize that this

19:54 ↗ project does indirectly drain to a

19:56 ↗ stream through a ditch and therefore

19:58 ↗ enhanced water quality treatment is

20:00 ↗ required by Department of Ecology

20:02 ↗ standards we chose a modular wetland

20:05 ↗ system to provide this treatment the

20:07 ↗ modular wetland system went through a

20:09 ↗ five year general use level designation

20:11 ↗ tape program Department of Ecology to

20:14 ↗ receive this enhanced stormwater

20:15 ↗ treatment designation it had to go

20:17 ↗ through several years of actual infield

20:19 ↗ testing and they had to measure the

20:21 ↗ results at the end of this testing all

20:24 ↗ of the modular wetland systems results

20:26 ↗ exceed the department of ecology x'

20:28 ↗ minimum standards so that's step one in

20:30 ↗ our defenses of keeping this water clean

20:32 ↗ that leaves our site then is piped to a

20:34 ↗ detention system that's about 70,000

20:37 ↗ cubic feet where it'll allow any

20:39 ↗ additional fine sedimentation that makes

20:41 ↗ it into this system to settle out then

20:44 ↗ it will be pumped up to a flow spreader

20:46 ↗ that's 100 feet long go across the tan

20:50 ↗ area I don't know if you remember if I

20:51 ↗ go back one slide here it's going to go

20:53 ↗ across this tan area so here's our level

20:55 ↗ spreader it's going to go through this

20:56 ↗ tan colored area for about seven feet

21:00 ↗ and then an additional about 25 feet

21:03 ↗ oops went the wrong way

21:05 ↗ additional 24 feet until it reaches the

21:08 ↗ ordinary high water mark in the ditch so

21:11 ↗ sort of sets the tone for the on-site

21:13 ↗ stormwater and what we're doing to

21:14 ↗ handle it to meet all of Ecology's

21:16 ↗ minimum standards

21:21 ↗ the modular wetlands system takes care

21:24 ↗ of total suspended solids heavy metals

21:27 ↗ it deals with phosphorus treatment which

21:30 ↗ is not something that we're technically

21:31 ↗ required to meet but it meets the

21:33 ↗ phosphorus treatment as well under the

21:35 ↗ Department of Ecology minimum standards

21:36 ↗ and then we're going to on top of that

21:40 ↗ obviously reduce our outfall through

21:43 ↗ this 30-foot riparian area based on the

21:46 ↗ findings of our project this water

21:50 ↗ quality device is not going to in any

21:52 ↗ way impact the water quality in this

21:55 ↗ ditch in a negative way and if anything

21:58 ↗ we're actually going to be adding to it

21:59 ↗ the project is subject to the newest

22:02 ↗ Department of Ecology manual which has

22:04 ↗ the highest water quality standards to

22:06 ↗ date all the 99.5 percent of water

22:09 ↗ that's coming from the surrounding

22:10 ↗ properties is not meeting the water

22:12 ↗ quality standard that our project meets

22:13 ↗ so we are going to actually have a

22:16 ↗ positive impact on the water in this

22:18 ↗ ditch excuse me

22:23 ↗ find sediment control is obviously an

22:25 ↗ important thing in a fish habitat we

22:28 ↗ don't want too much we don't want too

22:29 ↗ little the modular wetland system and

22:32 ↗ the residence time and the detention

22:34 ↗ system is going to provide adequate time

22:36 ↗ for the fine sediment to settle out into

22:39 ↗ the bottom of this system this is also

22:41 ↗ time that I would like to point out that

22:43 ↗ the modular wetland system will have to

22:45 ↗ be maintained on a regular basis and

22:47 ↗ that the city has a stormwater

22:49 ↗ maintenance program has required by our

22:51 ↗ stormwater drainage report that will

22:53 ↗ require the owner to go out and maintain

22:55 ↗ this modular wetland system and the

22:57 ↗ detention system on a regular basis the

23:01 ↗ systems themselves have their own

23:04 ↗ regulations around them that ecology

23:06 ↗ sets that require an annual maintenance

23:09 ↗ of the pretreatment chamber the main

23:14 ↗ treatment chamber actually the media in

23:16 ↗ that chamber is good for indefinitely

23:18 ↗ it's it's ecology has given it a a

23:21 ↗ essentially it's good for as long as it

23:23 ↗ that the facility will function

23:29 ↗ attenuated flow rates the project meets

23:33 ↗ the pre-developed rate so if this site

23:36 ↗ was forested which we have to take into

23:38 ↗ account that this site has actually been

23:39 ↗ a gravel site for the you know the bulk

23:41 ↗ of the last many years this site was

23:43 ↗ used as the staging area for the

23:45 ↗ relocation project of the stream and was

23:48 ↗ left as gravel so we're actually

23:50 ↗ modeling this site as if it were

23:52 ↗ forested a forested flat site that's

23:54 ↗ what our quality is our project runoff

23:57 ↗ is meeting that level of quality so that

24:01 ↗ you know when a major rain event happens

24:04 ↗ we have to meet as if it was a treed

24:05 ↗ forest based on this there is you know

24:09 ↗ no impact to the stream actually it's a

24:11 ↗ benefit as right now it's a gravel lot

24:13 ↗ and we were going we're going to be now

24:15 ↗ capturing that water taking it through

24:17 ↗ the modular wetland system and then

24:18 ↗ detaining and releasing it at the pre

24:20 ↗ developed forested rate loops the

24:25 ↗ shading function is a very important

24:27 ↗ function for any riparian area the

24:31 ↗ southern exposure of it is one of the

24:33 ↗ most important those I'm gonna go ahead

24:34 ↗ and jump to the next slide and jump back

24:35 ↗ and forth between these two the wall

24:40 ↗ along the the trail here is the southern

24:43 ↗ side of this riparian area all the

24:46 ↗ vegetation in green here is all the

24:48 ↗ washed out riparian areas this photo was

24:50 ↗ taken two days ago and so this is the

24:53 ↗ current vegetation as close as we can

24:55 ↗ get this is the current vegetation the

24:57 ↗ d-o-t planted over here is this gravel

25:00 ↗ lot that I was talking about that now

25:01 ↗ has some wild field grass growing in it

25:03 ↗ the property line is approximately in

25:06 ↗ this area the dealership will be located

25:08 ↗ over here the riparian area that was

25:10 ↗ print planted by d-o-t will now be

25:12 ↗ impacted in any way shape or form by

25:14 ↗ this project as far as crossing over

25:16 ↗ that property line the south side of

25:21 ↗ this riparian area was planted by d-o-t

25:24 ↗ with large trees that will grow in well

25:27 ↗ that will grow into large trees if you

25:30 ↗ recall the slide back a few slides back

25:33 ↗ we mentioned that we're not touching in

25:35 ↗ either native vegetation so these tall

25:36 ↗ trees that you see and the upper right

25:38 ↗ hand corner of this

25:39 ↗ Green those trees are going to remain as

25:41 ↗ well there are no trees on the northern

25:44 ↗ side along this area there are some

25:47 ↗ cottonwoods off to the left side of the

25:49 ↗ screen that we will be removing as part

25:51 ↗ of this project but those are 59 to 60

25:53 ↗ feet on the north side of this ditch and

25:55 ↗ don't provide shade benefits for the

25:57 ↗ ditch based on this the fact that we are

26:02 ↗ not impacting the riparian area at all

26:04 ↗ with this project we determined that

26:07 ↗ we're not having a direct or indirect

26:09 ↗ impact on the shading function of the

26:11 ↗ existing riparian area the last thing I

26:16 ↗ want to talk about is the large woody

26:17 ↗ debris recruitment I'm going to go ahead

26:20 ↗ and jump ahead to the slide here that

26:21 ↗ d-o-t as part of their project went

26:23 ↗ through an analysis of placing large

26:27 ↗ woody debris within the ditch area as

26:30 ↗ part of their project the impact that

26:35 ↗ our project will have on the large woody

26:37 ↗ debris recruitment is none we're not

26:39 ↗ going to go in and remove any of these

26:41 ↗ large woody debris they will maintain in

26:44 ↗ place as they currently are so to wrap

26:48 ↗ this up the task two conclusions based

26:51 ↗ on all the best available sciences and

26:53 ↗ determining whether or not our project

26:55 ↗ had a direct or indirect impact to the

26:57 ↗ riparian area of this ditch we conclude

27:00 ↗ that this project does not have a

27:01 ↗ significant impact either indirectly or

27:03 ↗ directly to the riparian area and with

27:07 ↗ that I will pass it back to Katie Katie

27:12 ↗ before you start I just like to offer

27:13 ↗ folks there's there's three more chairs

27:16 ↗ here if you would like to take one and

27:18 ↗ drag it back you're more than welcome to

27:19 ↗ do that you don't have to stand I just

27:25 ↗ want to say a few quick words before we

27:29 ↗ move on so again I wanted to reiterate

27:31 ↗ that at the last meeting you all asked

27:35 ↗ for more information so this

27:37 ↗ presentation was meant to provide that

27:40 ↗ additional information and staff read

27:44 ↗ the memos we worked with our peer

27:46 ↗ reviewer who also read and peer-review

27:48 ↗ the memos we met with the rivers and

27:51 ↗ streams board at the

27:52 ↗ meeting last night and we've been

27:54 ↗ receiving and reviewing public comment

27:56 ↗ as well so the combination of the

28:00 ↗ applicants memos our peer reviewers our

28:02 ↗ staff peer review public comments and

28:05 ↗ the rivers and streams have all fed into

28:08 ↗ staffs SEPA decision so the this is the

28:12 ↗ condition it's very hard to read I

28:14 ↗ apologize but it's also in the mdns

28:17 ↗ document that I handed around if anyone

28:19 ↗ wishes to look at it I've got a few

28:22 ↗ copies but essentially we have

28:25 ↗ recognized that the ditch has fish

28:30 ↗ habitat that needs to be we need to make

28:33 ↗ sure there are no significant adverse

28:35 ↗ impacts to that habitat that the habitat

28:38 ↗ is not diminished and so we are

28:42 ↗ requiring the planting area on the

28:45 ↗ property adjacent to that wash dot

28:48 ↗ planted area to also be densely planted

28:51 ↗ with native trees and shrubs we've

28:54 ↗ included a standard for density of tree

28:59 ↗ plantings and made a couple notes about

29:04 ↗ specific a specific type of tree that

29:06 ↗ hadn't been shown on the plans is a tree

29:09 ↗ the city believed it was more of a shrub

29:11 ↗ so we will work with the applicant to

29:14 ↗ decide on the specific species of trees

29:17 ↗ that are appropriate they're also in

29:21 ↗ order to prevent people animals and cars

29:25 ↗ from entering into these vegetated areas

29:28 ↗ both the on-site and the off-site we

29:30 ↗ will require wooden split rail fence to

29:34 ↗ be installed wheel stops or some other

29:37 ↗ mechanism to prevent cars from hanging

29:39 ↗ over into that vegetated area and then

29:44 ↗ we're also encouraging the applicant if

29:47 ↗ they're able to to add additional

29:49 ↗ plantings in the wash area in a previous

29:52 ↗ hearing we mentioned that the applicant

29:54 ↗ we were requiring the applicant to plant

29:56 ↗ in wash dot and that was an error on

29:59 ↗ staff's part we can't we can't require

30:01 ↗ them to plant on somebody else's

30:02 ↗ property but we certainly would

30:04 ↗ encourage that if they do have a

30:05 ↗ relationship

30:06 ↗ whosh dot - to add additional native

30:09 ↗ trees and shrubs and ground cover there

30:11 ↗ and then finally we wanted to recognize

30:14 ↗ the potential for impacts from

30:16 ↗ construction related activities so in

30:19 ↗ addition to the city's temporary erosion

30:23 ↗ and sediment control standards that

30:26 ↗ would be required for any site we're

30:28 ↗ also going to require a double silt

30:30 ↗ fence to be placed along both the North

30:33 ↗ Fork of Issaquah Creek and this ditch to

30:36 ↗ prevent any sort of sediment from

30:38 ↗ getting into the waterway and with that

30:42 ↗ I think I will close my presentation and

30:46 ↗ open up for questions or we can move to

30:50 ↗ public comment well I think what we will

30:54 ↗ do at this point is allow for public

30:56 ↗ input commissioners do you have specific

31:03 ↗ questions right now or do you want to

31:05 ↗ wait till the public has chance to

31:07 ↗ comment thank you okay so I think the

31:12 ↗ formal process is for me to open the

31:14 ↗ meeting to public comment what I would

31:16 ↗ encourage you to do although you do not

31:18 ↗ have to is if if you would choose sign

31:20 ↗ in before you talk if you'd like to

31:22 ↗ speak I don't know how many people are

31:25 ↗ going to choose to do that would just

31:26 ↗ suggest maybe no more than five minutes

31:29 ↗ just so we don't stay here until 2:00 or

31:31 ↗ 3:00 in the morning but we're willing to

31:33 ↗ do that now we really do want to listen

31:35 ↗ to the public input so at this point

31:37 ↗ we'll open the meeting for public

31:40 ↗ comment

31:44 ↗ I don't wealthy I don't think anybody

31:50 ↗ signed up I'm gonna try to get a map up

31:59 ↗ here could ask you to introduce yourself

32:01 ↗ and tell us your address and and go for

32:12 ↗ so because I'm bored out of my mind with

32:15 ↗ this topic I'm gonna tell it like a very

32:18 ↗ strange Halloween oriented bedtime story

32:21 ↗ and it's actually a tale of two streams

32:25 ↗ and there was a big stream and there was

32:28 ↗ a little stream and the little stream

32:30 ↗ fed into the big stream and the little

32:33 ↗ stream feeding into a big stream is

32:36 ↗ called a tributary they're both streams

32:39 ↗ it's just one feeds into the other and

32:44 ↗ interestingly these two streams were of

32:48 ↗ great importance to a bunch of big

32:51 ↗ agencies the little stream got a million

32:54 ↗ dollar improvement the total improvement

32:56 ↗ between both 7.2 million dollars because

33:00 ↗ it was so important to create a

33:03 ↗ wonderful fish habitat so we could have

33:06 ↗ fish forever right fish now

33:11 ↗ interestingly in this scenario the city

33:16 ↗ is calling the little stream a ditch and

33:20 ↗ you go how is it possible that these two

33:23 ↗ streams with basically the same water

33:26 ↗ and you know meeting together at the end

33:30 ↗ could one could be a ditch and one could

33:34 ↗ be a stream and a ditch has no

33:36 ↗ protections and a stream has a hundred

33:40 ↗ feet of protection so the city in its

33:47 ↗ interesting way said that no natural

33:52 ↗ water source makes it a ditch because

33:56 ↗ it's man-made and so they show slides

33:59 ↗ and they say well you have got

34:02 ↗ stormwater runoff and me being the

34:05 ↗ curious sort and of course everybody

34:08 ↗ wants to know what stormwater means well

34:11 ↗ storm water means runoff during and

34:13 ↗ following precipitation and snowmelt

34:15 ↗ events including surface runoff drainage

34:18 ↗ or inner flow well that means nothing to

34:21 ↗ me

34:21 ↗ so I said well okay I got the word run

34:24 ↗ there runoff was a primary word what is

34:26 ↗ runoff interesting

34:28 ↗ we runoff means water originating from

34:30 ↗ rainfall natural another precipitation

34:34 ↗ that is found in drainage facilities

34:36 ↗ drainage facilities I think those are

34:38 ↗ man-made but rivers streams spring seeps

34:41 ↗ ponds lakes wetlands as well as shallow

34:44 ↗ groundwater and and runoff sources on

34:49 ↗ the ground so interestingly in our

34:53 ↗ definition where stormwater runoff boy

34:58 ↗ those are natural sources in our

35:00 ↗ stormwater runoff I'm not really sure

35:03 ↗ how we are saying our stormwater is all

35:06 ↗ man-made sources not all of it is but

35:11 ↗ I'm losing this battle so I dig in I dig

35:15 ↗ in again and I say to myself okay well

35:20 ↗ let's see if I can find a natural source

35:24 ↗ that's going to be the smoking gun right

35:26 ↗ and so I talk to wash dot and I get all

35:30 ↗ their reports for their whole series of

35:32 ↗ borings to see where groundwater is and

35:34 ↗ then I map

35:37 ↗ I don't map I look at their maps of how

35:41 ↗ they built the stream and their borings

35:44 ↗ and their maps show one a great

35:46 ↗ variation in groundwater levels right

35:49 ↗ next to the tributary of seven feet in a

35:52 ↗ given year that's a big difference on

35:54 ↗ the other side it's 14 feet so it's huge

35:56 ↗ it's very connected and so the bottom of

36:00 ↗ this stream and I learned a bunch of new

36:02 ↗ words when I was doing this is in the

36:04 ↗ ground water from all of the wash dot

36:06 ↗ information and they studied the ground

36:08 ↗ water for I think two years so they're

36:11 ↗ very clear and you should have gotten

36:14 ↗ that information because I did provide

36:16 ↗ it to the city to provide to you so I

36:20 ↗ say this stream this tributary and the

36:24 ↗ big one to our groundwater feds so they

36:26 ↗ should be a stream but no the city does

36:30 ↗ it's still a ditch even though now we

36:33 ↗ have two different ways of saying that

36:35 ↗ natural water is going

36:36 ↗ to that tributary which remember is a

36:39 ↗ stream and so then today interestingly

36:42 ↗ at 3 o'clock in the morning I was on the

36:45 ↗ Department of Ecology website and I

36:47 ↗ found that we have a stream that flows

36:52 ↗ right into the tributary area and it is

36:56 ↗ identified as an intermittent stream by

36:58 ↗ the Department of Ecology and mapped as

37:01 ↗ such and I also sent that to you today

37:03 ↗ so you should have that so this is

37:05 ↗ source number three of natural water

37:09 ↗ going into the tributary but tonight

37:14 ↗ disturbingly it's still a ditch because

37:18 ↗ the city wants it to be a ditch an

37:21 ↗ evergreen Ford wants it to be a ditch

37:23 ↗ and I gotta say after the millions of

37:27 ↗ dollars investments in public money for

37:29 ↗ the fish I have to be here to speak for

37:32 ↗ the fish because the city is not and the

37:35 ↗ developer is not so then I'm moving just

37:39 ↗ very quickly on mature vegetation that

37:42 ↗ mature vegetation is invasive blackberry

37:45 ↗ and nightshade so deadly nightshade very

37:51 ↗ poisonous don't eat the berries you'll

37:53 ↗ die it's an infestation that is what the

37:57 ↗ mature vegetation is that is preserving

37:59 ↗ the stream I also sent you a long

38:02 ↗ diatribe on what I consider mitigation

38:06 ↗ to be in this situation and I will leave

38:09 ↗ you with this in our critical area code

38:12 ↗ a cell monitoring stream needs a hundred

38:16 ↗ foot buffer those same fish just

38:21 ↗ adjacent from each other they are saying

38:23 ↗ will not be impacted at all with no

38:27 ↗ buffer according to their best available

38:29 ↗ science it can't be both ways the fish

38:32 ↗ don't know what stream they're in what

38:34 ↗ is best available science our code of a

38:36 ↗ hundred foot buffer necessary to protect

38:39 ↗ these fish or what they're saying they

38:41 ↗ don't barely have to do anything

38:45 ↗ something is freaky and

38:48 ↗ that's my Halloween closure thank you

39:00 ↗ other members of the public wish to

39:03 ↗ speak to help yourself please introduce

39:04 ↗ yourself before he speak

39:15 ↗ hi good evening and thank you all for

39:17 ↗ serving my name is Steve Pereira I live

39:20 ↗ at 170 Northeast Starwood Street here in

39:22 ↗ Issaquah only really relevant in the

39:25 ↗ path that I am on the North Fork of the

39:26 ↗ aguar Creek so I wanted to testify to

39:30 ↗ that fact for several points the first

39:32 ↗ is I know as we kind of look at

39:35 ↗ downstream flooding that has happened

39:37 ↗ here in Issaquah periodically I'm kind

39:40 ↗ of concerned that downstream this ditch

39:42 ↗ tributary area does have water runoff

39:44 ↗ capacity that would be removed by adding

39:48 ↗ this parking area to absorb water that

39:51 ↗ should be one of the considerations the

39:54 ↗ second though is that I can definitely

39:57 ↗ test that there are fish in the water

39:58 ↗ way especially here in Issaquah where we

40:00 ↗ talk about loving our salmon and having

40:03 ↗ seven days and there's benefits that we

40:06 ↗ treasure both economically economically

40:08 ↗ we get from salmon and that we

40:10 ↗ environmentally its stewardship wise

40:11 ↗ treasure they want to keep in mind I

40:16 ↗ kind of talked about this in a letter

40:18 ↗ that I sent that you should have all

40:19 ↗ received don't try to repeat my

40:22 ↗ testimony or testimony but I wanted to

40:24 ↗ highlight a couple of facts the first

40:26 ↗ was that aspirational aspect of who we

40:29 ↗ are as Issaquah the second was when I

40:32 ↗ read through the consultants report

40:35 ↗ there was a lot of language in there

40:37 ↗ that it seemed to me that kind of not

40:40 ↗ very specific about as far as what the

40:42 ↗ benefits were of having a hundred foot

40:45 ↗ buffer clean water there were a lot of

40:49 ↗ ways that maybe this new improved system

40:53 ↗ doesn't meet or doesn't standardize as

40:56 ↗ far as having those benefits that I

40:57 ↗ think need to be considered there was a

40:59 ↗ percentage chart in there that talked

41:01 ↗ about the size of the buffer and the

41:05 ↗ percentage of benefit that was gained by

41:07 ↗ having the buffer there's still some

41:09 ↗ benefit in there percentage-wise for

41:11 ↗ having salmon they also talked about

41:14 ↗ that there was a that the water that

41:18 ↗ this proposed stream doesn't use for

41:21 ↗ spawning but only for habitat and for

41:23 ↗ feeding and for resting still

41:27 ↗ necessary parts of this stream for the

41:29 ↗ salmon to return each year to spawn

41:32 ↗ again further up the stream where they

41:33 ↗ were hatched and raised so that's we're

41:36 ↗ leaving off some points that need to be

41:37 ↗ considered the third was I guess I would

41:44 ↗ talk about a logic class I took where it

41:46 ↗ talked about difference between

41:48 ↗ necessary and sufficient conditions I

41:50 ↗ looked through the city code and it

41:52 ↗ seemed clear to me that we did city code

41:54 ↗ talked about 100 feet buffer is the

41:57 ↗ legal requirement there's enough in the

41:59 ↗ city code that talks about needing to

42:02 ↗ preserve that had a foot buffer with

42:04 ↗ maybe a 25% reduction possible it seems

42:09 ↗ like there's sufficient reason for all

42:11 ↗ of you to say in a fairly strong way

42:14 ↗ that part of who we are as is crime

42:17 ↗ wanting to be this different a unique

42:19 ↗ City is preserving those unique places

42:21 ↗ nuke ways of gonna go there that there's

42:26 ↗ already been testimony that says 7

42:28 ↗ million dollars have been invested in

42:29 ↗ trying to preserve the salmon waterways

42:30 ↗ we have a way of a narrow opportunity to

42:35 ↗ preserve that I guess I just don't

42:41 ↗ fathom or understand why this process

42:44 ↗ has gotten this far where it takes that

42:47 ↗ harder of a look to say this is who we

42:50 ↗ are want to be to try to use our code

42:52 ↗ and our public dollars to preserve

42:54 ↗ something that we treasure and I'm

42:57 ↗ looking to all of you to make that

42:59 ↗ strong stand and ask that you please

43:02 ↗ consider that as your basis for making a

43:06 ↗ strong decision it's in opposition of

43:09 ↗ the approving of this construction thank

43:14 ↗ you

43:23 ↗ my name is Mary Lynch I reside at 269 o

43:27 ↗ North West Oak Crest Drive I just want

43:29 ↗ to thank you

43:30 ↗ commissioners for you know your meeting

43:34 ↗ last month when it was and I need it

43:37 ↗ back to the rivers of stream board for a

43:40 ↗ review my disappointment though is with

43:43 ↗ city staff and in looking back through

43:45 ↗ the rivers and stream Board minutes and

43:47 ↗ yes this did go now three times before

43:49 ↗ the rivers and stream boards but nowhere

43:52 ↗ in the minutes do I really see that

43:54 ↗ staff clearly identified to the rivers

43:57 ↗ and stream board what decision they had

43:59 ↗ already made in calling this a ditch if

44:01 ↗ you look at the one report that was sent

44:05 ↗ to the rivers and stream board it

44:07 ↗ mentions in one of them a tributary it

44:10 ↗ doesn't say at a ditch they're all

44:11 ↗ they're talking about in that meeting

44:13 ↗ was the fact that they wanted to reduce

44:16 ↗ the hundred foot buffer on the north

44:17 ↗ side or in the North Creek a portion

44:20 ↗ down from a hundred and even there if

44:22 ↗ you read through the notes in the

44:23 ↗ comments from the board they weren't in

44:26 ↗ agreement with that even though in the

44:28 ↗ minutes they had to go back and correct

44:29 ↗ their minutes because city staff said

44:31 ↗ that they did they did not if you read

44:33 ↗ the minutes the corrected minutes nor

44:35 ↗ was this it was only with public comment

44:39 ↗ just prior to your last meeting that all

44:42 ↗ this information that was done and

44:44 ↗ research it was done for the watch

44:48 ↗ thought project was that brought to

44:49 ↗ light to you and then last night to the

44:53 ↗ rivers and stream board this was you

44:55 ↗ know available information and data that

44:58 ↗ city staff did not use in making some of

45:01 ↗ the early on decisions that they should

45:03 ↗ have whatever green Ford and I think the

45:05 ↗ process is flawed we need to make sure

45:08 ↗ that development staff is representing

45:10 ↗ everybody including the fish and yes we

45:14 ↗ need to have you know it's nice to have

45:17 ↗ business here but if we're going to

45:19 ↗ maintain the quality of life and the

45:23 ↗ quality of the valley flow and the water

45:24 ↗ we need to do it right we need to

45:27 ↗ identify these issues early on in the

45:29 ↗ process and I don't think it's right

45:32 ↗ that we wait to the very last minute

45:34 ↗ and show this studies and information

45:36 ↗ that we had and this decision for the

45:38 ↗ development staff is basically based on

45:40 ↗ calling to the ditch is in 1996 versus

45:44 ↗ using the current data of this is the

45:46 ↗ stream not a ditch

46:06 ↗ good evening my name is Dave Gretchen

46:09 ↗ I'm a longtime resident of both Issaquah

46:11 ↗ and Sammamish for 34 years I'm also a

46:13 ↗ retired finance leader from the Boeing

46:15 ↗ Company same 10 year 34 years in a

46:18 ↗ strong advocate for local business or

46:20 ↗ supporting the local business especially

46:22 ↗ those that are environmentally friendly

46:24 ↗ I've had the opportunity over the last

46:26 ↗ two weeks to review the site over the

46:29 ↗ last two nights have had the opportunity

46:31 ↗ to sit through a knowledgeable

46:33 ↗ presentation and my conclusion of

46:36 ↗ looking at the data is the ever

46:37 ↗ Evergreen Ford Lincoln project and no

46:41 ↗ way will harm the fish or species in

46:44 ↗ that area and they base it on the

46:46 ↗ following information it's my

46:47 ↗ understanding on the south side of the

46:49 ↗ property that there's a ditch and that's

46:51 ↗ not necessarily a spawning ground for

46:53 ↗ the fish but a place for them to feed

46:55 ↗ and rest it's also my understanding the

46:58 ↗ source water the ditch is a collection

46:59 ↗ of stormwater from the highlands as well

47:02 ↗ as neighboring businesses and it's also

47:05 ↗ my understanding that the Evergreen

47:06 ↗ State proposal is that their water and

47:09 ↗ stormwater that would come off of their

47:11 ↗ property would be treated to a level of

47:13 ↗ purity equal to or greater than the

47:15 ↗ existing ground water in my book this is

47:19 ↗ a win this is a win for the community

47:21 ↗ it's a win for the environment and it's

47:24 ↗ certainly a win for the hundreds of

47:26 ↗ families that are employed by Evergreen

47:28 ↗ Ford Lincoln thank you

47:49 ↗ mm David Kepler I'm representing it's

47:52 ↗ coops trails club tonight why is this a

47:55 ↗ ditch well it's a ditch because Cadman

47:57 ↗ just didn't and others in Lakeside have

48:01 ↗ to retain their drainage and clarify

48:04 ↗ their water and you just can't go

48:08 ↗ unrestrained and it's an artificial and

48:11 ↗ not being artificial created facilities

48:14 ↗ to clean up the water and measure its

48:17 ↗ release same with Issaquah Highlands if

48:20 ↗ we could just let the Issaquah Highlands

48:21 ↗ bleed all their water over the hill have

48:23 ↗ it natural then this would be a creek we

48:29 ↗ need some fortunately we do have SEPA to

48:33 ↗ back up when our code is deficient I'm

48:36 ↗ not sure what we heard tonight was

48:38 ↗ adequate I don't believe it's adequate

48:40 ↗ in the CEPA revision when this is all

48:45 ↗ through or I would hope you will go over

48:49 ↗ to the Parkway and look at this 7

48:53 ↗ million dollar project and look at the

48:56 ↗ North Fork and look at this tributary

48:58 ↗ and see the work that's been going into

49:00 ↗ it how much is public money has been

49:03 ↗ invested in two creeks also we're going

49:07 ↗ to be looking at chapter 18 the city

49:09 ↗ which deals with critical areas and a

49:12 ↗ lot of the land use codes I hope you

49:15 ↗ will be thoughtful in your looking at

49:18 ↗ that and even though you're not the

49:20 ↗ Planning Policy Commission I hope you

49:22 ↗ will do work on that process as it goes

49:25 ↗ through to make sure you have the codes

49:28 ↗ that you need to appropriately evaluate

49:31 ↗ projects thank you

49:43 ↗ hi my name is Taylor Miller I'm a

49:47 ↗ business owner

49:47 ↗ and also a long time resident of the

49:49 ↗ Issaquah area I'm here tonight to speak

49:51 ↗ in favor of allowing evergreen Ford

49:54 ↗ Lincoln to the ability to grow their

49:56 ↗ business here in Issaquah outlined in

49:58 ↗ their presentation I have gone telemetry

50:01 ↗ school to high school here in this

50:04 ↗ managed district watt school district

50:05 ↗ I've grown up playing sports here in

50:07 ↗ Issaquah I've worked in Issaquah since I

50:09 ↗ was 16 years old to present

50:12 ↗ so I'm genuinely invested in this

50:14 ↗ community and in this city I think it's

50:17 ↗ fair to say that it's not really a

50:18 ↗ secret that when you come off of a 90 on

50:20 ↗ exit 17 it's always been an eyesore

50:23 ↗ those dog kennels it's the first thing

50:25 ↗ you see when you wrap around and that's

50:26 ↗ the entrance to our city I don't know

50:30 ↗ about you guys but I've personally

50:31 ↗ walked down there and I saw trash I saw

50:35 ↗ feces needles where druggies are I mean

50:38 ↗ that is what is that's what's rolling

50:40 ↗ into this ditch this project that is

50:44 ↗ being displayed here it's gonna create a

50:46 ↗ gateway from the east that will not only

50:48 ↗ enhance but improve the water quality to

50:50 ↗ this ditch the city has an opportunity

50:53 ↗ right now for this site to be developed

50:56 ↗ by a responsible local business owner

51:00 ↗ who understands and respects the value

51:03 ↗ of business but also understands the

51:06 ↗ value of the environment and is really

51:08 ↗ and is willing to work together with

51:09 ↗ those two things

51:12 ↗ overall allowing Evergreen to improve

51:15 ↗ this site would greatly improve the

51:16 ↗ environment over its current condition

51:20 ↗ in my opinion I support evergreens

51:22 ↗ project wholeheartedly

51:33 ↗ good evening first thank you for your

51:36 ↗ service my name is Kathy McCrory I'm the

51:39 ↗ CEO for the Chamber of Commerce here in

51:41 ↗ Issaquah and I'd like to read a little

51:43 ↗ bit of a letter we've already submitted

51:45 ↗ to the Commission and to the mayor's

51:48 ↗ office some of it repeats some of the

51:50 ↗ information that's been shared this

51:51 ↗ evening so we'll not be sharing the

51:53 ↗ whole letter but you do have it

51:55 ↗ the Greater Issaquah Chamber of Commerce

51:58 ↗ Board of Directors would like to take a

51:59 ↗ moment of your time and impart our take

52:03 ↗ on doing business and being a member of

52:06 ↗ this community businesses that have

52:08 ↗ chose to locate here and share our

52:11 ↗ community values and Evergreen Ford is

52:14 ↗ one such long-standing not to mention

52:17 ↗ family owned business as you are aware

52:20 ↗ businesses are important element to

52:23 ↗ keeping our Issaquah strong healthy and

52:25 ↗ supporting the high quality of life that

52:29 ↗ we have come to expect here in Issaquah

52:30 ↗ we have roles and expectations for

52:33 ↗ conducting business clarity and

52:35 ↗ consistency are compulsory when those

52:39 ↗ rules change and are enveloped or the

52:42 ↗ envelope is pushed on it sends a

52:44 ↗ negative message and results in loss of

52:46 ↗ time resources and produces unnecessary

52:50 ↗ stresses it appears though the review

52:53 ↗ process evergreen Ford and its project

52:55 ↗ have been put through the test and

52:57 ↗ having to stand up to further scrutiny

52:59 ↗ and analysis we have looked at their

53:02 ↗ project and see that the plans outlined

53:04 ↗ on how it will improve water quality and

53:08 ↗ the Northfork Issaquah Creek exist by

53:11 ↗ the improvement of vegetation between

53:13 ↗ the new development and the creek the

53:15 ↗ improved vegetation will also improve

53:17 ↗ the water quality and provide shading

53:20 ↗ for the salmon from our view it seems

53:22 ↗ this will protect and improve our salmon

53:25 ↗ habitat it's also our understanding that

53:28 ↗ ultimately the plans for the water and

53:31 ↗ the stormwater discharge from Evergreen

53:33 ↗ Ford are to be treated at the same

53:34 ↗ purity or higher standards than

53:36 ↗ groundwater it seems that this improve

53:39 ↗ Minn is this a benefit to any species

53:41 ↗ using that waterway we ask that you

53:45 ↗ support permitting the project as it

53:47 ↗ will improve over existing environment

53:50 ↗ by removing invasive species of plants

53:53 ↗ directing light away from wetland areas

53:56 ↗ removing noises away from critical areas

54:00 ↗ directing any runoff from the wetlands

54:02 ↗ treating stormwater and control rate at

54:08 ↗ a controlled rate that will preserve

54:09 ↗ plants and soil and installs barriers to

54:13 ↗ protect areas from people and pets

54:15 ↗ lastly why not consideration of the

54:18 ↗ permit review process we would be remiss

54:20 ↗ in saying that through Evergreen Ford's

54:22 ↗ taxes jobs provided and charitable

54:25 ↗ contributions to our local nonprofits

54:28 ↗ they are important to all of us and we

54:30 ↗ should as community help ensure we

54:33 ↗ retain them here in our community thank

54:36 ↗ you in advance for your consideration

54:37 ↗ and again for your service in the

54:39 ↗ community as a whole this is

54:41 ↗ respectfully submitted on behalf of all

54:43 ↗ of us at the greater Issaquah chamber

54:57 ↗ hello Susanville 28:25 Northwest pine

55:02 ↗ cone drive 24 year resident obvious quoi

55:07 ↗ and thank you for volunteering your time

55:09 ↗ expertise to the city of Issaquah I had

55:13 ↗ a letter or a pice in a letter earlier

55:15 ↗ not sure if you had time to review it I

55:18 ↗ was at the River and stream meeting last

55:21 ↗ night until 9:30 and I can't give you

55:27 ↗ that thing back because things have

55:29 ↗ changed at 350 for today

55:31 ↗ a final SEPA condition came out

55:33 ↗ informing us of new information so my

55:37 ↗ first question is do you have time to

55:40 ↗ look through everything and make a

55:41 ↗ really sound good decision based on all

55:44 ↗ the new current information and the

55:48 ↗ second question is there's a lot of

55:53 ↗ public comment last night and it was not

55:57 ↗ some it was based on if evergreen Ford

56:00 ↗ is a good partner in business with us

56:02 ↗ and I think we all are agreement that

56:06 ↗ they are and I don't know if that is the

56:08 ↗ question here why is it all or nothing

56:11 ↗ well I can't we be able to preserve the

56:13 ↗ environment and give Evergreen Ford what

56:16 ↗ they need why is there no compromise all

56:19 ↗ I hear is all or nothing and that's what

56:22 ↗ I want to leave you with today thank you

56:39 ↗ either my name is Ned Nelson out of it

56:43 ↗ 617 Northwest Everwood Drive lived there

56:45 ↗ for 25 years I thought I was gonna be

56:48 ↗ the oldest one here in terms of

56:50 ↗ longevity but apparently not I come to

56:53 ↗ you as a 20 year veteran of the United

56:54 ↗ States Air Force in 25 years with the

56:56 ↗ Boeing Company we loved Issaquah lived

56:59 ↗ all over America in the world pic Disick

57:02 ↗ was a wonderful place to live and when

57:05 ↗ number one reason is we picked it was

57:07 ↗ because there was a whole lot of people

57:09 ↗ just like all of you in this room and my

57:12 ↗ compliments again to your people up

57:15 ↗ there on the pedestals I honored you you

57:18 ↗ are great

57:19 ↗ serving your city now why would a grown

57:22 ↗ man come to this meeting I come to you

57:25 ↗ because of next door

57:27 ↗ the social media site next door which

57:31 ↗ had a lot of articles probably written

57:34 ↗ by my friends over there about a ditch

57:37 ↗ and I said if this city is getting all

57:41 ↗ upset about a ditch I want to go hear

57:44 ↗ what they want to say what's what's

57:46 ↗ going on about the ditch incidentally I

57:48 ↗ want to start this conversation off with

57:51 ↗ I don't know one person in this room I

57:54 ↗ don't know any of you up there

57:56 ↗ I don't know any of you opposers I don't

57:59 ↗ even know where the evergreen Ford

58:01 ↗ people are and I'm not sure where this

58:02 ↗ the citizens are so I don't know those I

58:06 ↗ honor those people that are opposed to

58:08 ↗ this project that's one great thing

58:11 ↗ about our country things that I fought

58:13 ↗ for you can have opposing opinions I

58:16 ↗ have worked with you your people on

58:20 ↗ planting trees on the Issaquah Creek on

58:23 ↗ the down in Lake Sammamish on the state

58:25 ↗ park I've got my hands dirty I did it

58:29 ↗ graciously with the Boy Scouts and

58:30 ↗ church groups it was great I go to the

58:33 ↗ Salmon Hatchery all the time I'd bring

58:35 ↗ every visitor there it's great so with

58:40 ↗ that said I come to this meeting and I

58:42 ↗ go what are we talking about last Sunday

58:45 ↗ I went to Evergreen fort

58:49 ↗ never been in Evergreen Ford but I go

58:51 ↗ there on Sunday morning at 7 o'clock and

58:53 ↗ I go boy this is a really nice place

58:56 ↗ this is clean I didn't see one bit of

58:59 ↗ garbage I didn't see it was immaculate

59:01 ↗ that's the current Evergreen Ford and I

59:05 ↗ said these guys look like pretty good

59:06 ↗ citizens they're there doing their job

59:10 ↗ and being a car dealer incidentally I

59:13 ↗ should preface this my father was a Ford

59:16 ↗ dealer in 1940 in Moscow Idaho the darn

59:21 ↗ war came along and we had to move but

59:24 ↗ anyway I do have a background of that

59:28 ↗ evergreen Ford looks like it's a model

59:32 ↗ business for our community why would we

59:35 ↗ want to send them off to another place

59:37 ↗ next thing is and I've heard tokens of

59:40 ↗ it from from the pro people here this is

59:44 ↗ this is pretty good for business I mean

59:47 ↗ we one of the attractions of Issaquah is

59:50 ↗ we have a lot of good businesses we

59:52 ↗ don't have to drive to bellevue or to

59:56 ↗ seattle to buy a car we don't have to do

59:59 ↗ all these things so with that in mind I

1:00:01 ↗ will close and saying this project is a

1:00:05 ↗ goal thank you

1:00:19 ↗ good evening and and thank you all of

1:00:24 ↗ you for being here

1:00:25 ↗ my name is as as as is really Elliott

1:00:30 ↗ and I just like to say a little thing

1:00:34 ↗ here and I'd like to look at it from the

1:00:37 ↗ point of view of the fish that head up

1:00:42 ↗ this ditch apparently they're happy to

1:00:45 ↗ head up there

1:00:47 ↗ flap their flippers and swish their tail

1:00:50 ↗ the wreck and hey that's debts abide and

1:00:55 ↗ then I think well the status code says

1:00:58 ↗ that a stream should have a hundred foot

1:01:03 ↗ buffer but because this is a ditch it

1:01:07 ↗ doesn't and so somehow our friends who

1:01:10 ↗ just swam up there don't get the same

1:01:12 ↗ protection as fish and a stream and that

1:01:18 ↗ doesn't quite seem right because we

1:01:21 ↗ should be looking after a fish wherever

1:01:23 ↗ they are and so I'm not sure what to do

1:01:28 ↗ about this however I think that if you

1:01:34 ↗ recommend a larger buffer be provided

1:01:37 ↗ that would be a start and that would be

1:01:41 ↗ good and I'd like to see Evergreen Ford

1:01:45 ↗ here and I'd like to see a compromise as

1:01:48 ↗ a previous speaker mentioned that

1:01:51 ↗ connect that could accommodate both our

1:01:54 ↗ fish and evergreen Ford thank you

1:02:14 ↗ I don't live within the city limits can

1:02:16 ↗ I still speak ma'am awesome my name is

1:02:20 ↗ Tessa Smith and I own a small

1:02:22 ↗ women-owned women-led architecture firm

1:02:25 ↗ that works in this region and I was

1:02:29 ↗ struck by how there's a vocal minority

1:02:32 ↗ it feels like to me that would love to

1:02:37 ↗ see no development happen and I have a

1:02:40 ↗ sustainable design degree i lecture at

1:02:43 ↗ my alma mater the Evergreen State

1:02:45 ↗ College and University of Oregon

1:02:47 ↗ teaching young people how to operate

1:02:49 ↗ architecture firms in a way that honors

1:02:51 ↗ the planet sorry I'm nervous but the

1:03:02 ↗ problem with no development is that then

1:03:04 ↗ you don't get to say how things are

1:03:05 ↗ developed you have to support good

1:03:07 ↗ development and stop bad development

1:03:09 ↗ cities that don't grow die and then you

1:03:12 ↗ can't have money to honor fish and to

1:03:15 ↗ save areas that are worth saving there's

1:03:18 ↗ a sign here about Ansel Adams and I do

1:03:21 ↗ believe the quote is taken quite out of

1:03:22 ↗ context he protected the areas that

1:03:26 ↗ needed protecting but he also lived in a

1:03:28 ↗ house in Seattle and he used their roads

1:03:30 ↗ and their hospitals and those were

1:03:33 ↗ funded by maybe not good development

1:03:36 ↗ then but probably good development now

1:03:39 ↗ so I understand the appeal of passion

1:03:42 ↗ but what I tell the young people that I

1:03:45 ↗ sculpt and the students I encourage to

1:03:47 ↗ go into architecture is that passion is

1:03:49 ↗ good but reason is better I see a lot of

1:03:53 ↗ reasonable data before us that supports

1:03:55 ↗ that this would be an improvement to

1:03:57 ↗ that stream and that's coming from

1:04:00 ↗ someone who's quite left so left some of

1:04:02 ↗ my family won't talk to me

1:04:05 ↗ that's all I have to say thank you

1:04:23 ↗ hello I've been here before I believe my

1:04:28 ↗ name is Tony Ren I'm the executive

1:04:30 ↗ managing partner for evergreen Chevrolet

1:04:32 ↗ partner across the street from Evergreen

1:04:34 ↗ for its current location on 18th Avenue

1:04:37 ↗ Northwest here in Issaquah I've moved

1:04:41 ↗ here many years ago I started I was born

1:04:44 ↗ in Ballard a lot the only places as

1:04:46 ↗ fishy as this place I grew up next door

1:04:52 ↗ to the Woodland Park Zoo after that and

1:04:55 ↗ spent a lot of time with a fort in the

1:04:57 ↗ giraffes I've grown up loving animals

1:05:00 ↗ and I've grown up loving our Seattle

1:05:03 ↗ area my whole life we we had a

1:05:07 ↗ grandmother that lived on the top of

1:05:11 ↗ tiger mountain in a log cabin log house

1:05:13 ↗ when I grew up before I ninety and we

1:05:16 ↗ used to make the trip out here Tezuka

1:05:18 ↗ and my father sister was moved and built

1:05:25 ↗ the house in the backyard got in Tiger

1:05:26 ↗ Mountain and they turned out to be the

1:05:28 ↗ first pharmacist here in town in the 50s

1:05:31 ↗ and 60s right where the Ben Franklin was

1:05:33 ↗ so I have a long tie to the Issaquah

1:05:36 ↗ community and the northwest and the

1:05:38 ↗ Puget Sound community dan my partner Dan

1:05:42 ↗ Rowe and his family moved here in 98 I

1:05:45 ↗ moved Issaquah with my family my wife

1:05:48 ↗ Lynn in 1999 from Everett area the

1:05:55 ↗ reason I bring this up is I think it's

1:05:56 ↗ important to be local and I think it's

1:05:57 ↗ important to have local ties to the area

1:05:59 ↗ and and we have that and the reason I'm

1:06:03 ↗ bringing this up I want you to know

1:06:04 ↗ whoever Green is it's not about cars

1:06:09 ↗ it's about family and it's about

1:06:11 ↗ business and it's about community and it

1:06:13 ↗ has been since the day I moved here when

1:06:15 ↗ we moved here we made promises to

1:06:17 ↗ everyone in our family and everyone that

1:06:19 ↗ we did business with that we were going

1:06:21 ↗ to join the community full force and we

1:06:23 ↗ did just that we joined rotary Bijan

1:06:25 ↗ Kiwanis we joined the Chamber of

1:06:27 ↗ Commerce

1:06:28 ↗ I've spent 18 years off and on my wife

1:06:31 ↗ six years me six years he's another six

1:06:33 ↗ years on the board of directors for the

1:06:35 ↗ Chamber of Commerce

1:06:36 ↗ wife's been the vice president of

1:06:38 ↗ downtown Issaquah sociation and she made

1:06:40 ↗ it to president after that she took two

1:06:43 ↗ terms there she's saying national anthem

1:06:46 ↗ for the rotary run for salmon days for

1:06:49 ↗ years does the announcing at the parade

1:06:51 ↗ we provide all the cars and drive all

1:06:54 ↗ the dignitaries around to the parade we

1:06:56 ↗ have a great time doing it it's one of

1:06:57 ↗ the one of the greatest things we do

1:06:59 ↗ yearly is salmon days and we love every

1:07:01 ↗ minute of it our hearts here right after

1:07:05 ↗ we got here the first two years we got

1:07:07 ↗ here we were named King County Municipal

1:07:09 ↗ business of the year three years after

1:07:12 ↗ we opened the next year the King County

1:07:16 ↗ or excuse me the Chamber of Commerce

1:07:18 ↗ named us business people of the year

1:07:21 ↗ ten years later Dan Roe was named

1:07:23 ↗ business person of the year here by the

1:07:25 ↗ Issaquah Chamber we're belted into the

1:07:29 ↗ fabric of Issaquah we don't want to go

1:07:32 ↗ away we want to build a future for our

1:07:35 ↗ family we have over 200 families that we

1:07:38 ↗ employ we have five kids that we've

1:07:42 ↗ brought up dance brought up two and I

1:07:43 ↗ brought up three all five went to local

1:07:46 ↗ high schools went away to college came

1:07:49 ↗ back and all five were employed at

1:07:52 ↗ Evergreen right now I have my first

1:07:55 ↗ grandson that I picked up at pre-k down

1:07:57 ↗ it right down the street here at the

1:08:01 ↗ Commons I picked him up from pre-k and

1:08:03 ↗ the first time sunny it was it was a

1:08:04 ↗ Tuesday and the first day we we want we

1:08:07 ↗ walked down to the Salmon Hatchery

1:08:08 ↗ because I knew the fish were there and I

1:08:10 ↗ wanted him to see him sneak down by the

1:08:13 ↗ bridge and sneak right down he could

1:08:15 ↗ almost walk across the river so

1:08:16 ↗ beautiful whenever we get a new employee

1:08:19 ↗ I take that new employee down we parked

1:08:21 ↗ right on the side of the bridge when we

1:08:22 ↗ walked down between the gray house we

1:08:24 ↗ sneaked through the little gate there

1:08:26 ↗ and we walked down to the corner where

1:08:27 ↗ the right before it turns into the

1:08:29 ↗ hatchery and I show new employees what

1:08:32 ↗ is a quasi about I mean that's who we

1:08:35 ↗ are that's evergreen every room Ford

1:08:38 ↗ every ring Chevrolet evergreen Lincoln

1:08:40 ↗ that's who we are we we think we have a

1:08:44 ↗ good location we have a fantastic plan

1:08:46 ↗ they've laid out all that

1:08:48 ↗ the newest science for you we're gonna

1:08:50 ↗ leave it better than we found it that's

1:08:56 ↗ why you should approve the project and

1:08:58 ↗ and support us and help us support the

1:09:02 ↗ 200 families that we support with their

1:09:04 ↗ jobs their livelihood here so we're not

1:09:07 ↗ going anywhere as I know you aren't

1:09:08 ↗ either let's be partners thank you

1:09:22 ↗ hello my name is Carrie Ruby I was born

1:09:26 ↗ and raised right here as a claw been

1:09:27 ↗ here 51 years in Sammamish currently now

1:09:31 ↗ my family owns property that is a long

1:09:34 ↗ locust where this ditches and I believe

1:09:38 ↗ we've had it since the early 80s I can

1:09:41 ↗ honestly say there was sometimes weeks

1:09:42 ↗ months with zero water in this ditch as

1:09:46 ↗ the development in Sammamish has

1:09:48 ↗ progressed and the highlands per se

1:09:51 ↗ there's now more water in that ditch

1:09:53 ↗ I also agree in the comments earlier

1:09:56 ↗ about compromise if the fish are somehow

1:09:59 ↗ finding their way into this ditch isn't

1:10:01 ↗ there a way to direct them to stay in

1:10:03 ↗ the creek somehow so it can't get into

1:10:05 ↗ the ditch the city is growing it doesn't

1:10:09 ↗ have the one stop sign at Gilman in

1:10:13 ↗ front like it used to 40 years ago we

1:10:16 ↗ used to keep our dogs at Carlson kennels

1:10:18 ↗ on that same corner and it's sad to see

1:10:21 ↗ it be empty and vacant and an eyesore

1:10:24 ↗ for the city right now I'm supportive of

1:10:28 ↗ Evergreen Ford I'm supportive of the

1:10:30 ↗ salmon and the fish so I'm urging

1:10:34 ↗ compromise for everybody thank you

1:10:55 ↗ good evening I prepared the statement

1:10:57 ↗ I'd just like to read my name is Warren

1:11:00 ↗ Michaelson I'm a resident of Sammamish

1:11:01 ↗ and a longtime customer of Evergreen

1:11:03 ↗ Ford Lincoln I'm here to encourage the

1:11:05 ↗ development commission board to grant

1:11:07 ↗ evergreen ford lincoln permission to

1:11:08 ↗ construct their new dealership as

1:11:10 ↗ outlined in their presentation after

1:11:13 ↗ personally walking the site and

1:11:14 ↗ reviewing it and seeing the presentation

1:11:17 ↗ again tonight after last night it is

1:11:19 ↗ obvious of the ditch on the south side

1:11:20 ↗ the property is simply there to drain

1:11:22 ↗ the overflow water out of the Issaquah

1:11:24 ↗ highlands retention system into the

1:11:26 ↗ Sammamish basins ecosystem further

1:11:29 ↗ downstream furthermore it's my

1:11:31 ↗ understanding that this man-made

1:11:33 ↗ man-made itch only carries water when is

1:11:36 ↗ released from the retention vaults and

1:11:38 ↗ is completely dried during certain times

1:11:41 ↗ of the year it seems clear to me from

1:11:43 ↗ the biologists civil engineers and

1:11:46 ↗ city's perspective that the Evergreen

1:11:49 ↗ Ford Lincoln dealership as designed will

1:11:51 ↗ have no impact on this ditch I'm deeply

1:11:55 ↗ concerned that the Evergreen Ford

1:11:57 ↗ Lincoln if that if ever green Ford

1:11:58 ↗ Lincoln is not permitted to build their

1:12:00 ↗ new dealership has designed we may lose

1:12:03 ↗ a very valuable business in our

1:12:05 ↗ community as I understand it evergreen

1:12:09 ↗ Ford Lincoln employs approximately 200

1:12:11 ↗ people and it's an avid supporter of our

1:12:13 ↗ East Side schools towns and various

1:12:16 ↗ nonprofit organizations in addition I

1:12:20 ↗ believe that developing the property is

1:12:21 ↗ designed would remove the current

1:12:22 ↗ eyesore by removing the old dog kennel

1:12:25 ↗ that I understand occasionally houses

1:12:27 ↗ drug users therefore I strongly support

1:12:30 ↗ allowing Evergreen for Lincoln to build

1:12:33 ↗ on their site as designed thank you

1:12:45 ↗ my name is right and oil I'm counsel for

1:12:48 ↗ evergreen Ford

1:12:49 ↗ home and I to express appreciation a

1:12:53 ↗ couple things that I want to address a

1:12:57 ↗ little bit is the theory of compromise

1:13:00 ↗ like this is a conflict or a battle

1:13:02 ↗ that's not the way ever going evergreen

1:13:04 ↗ has gone into this process it's worked

1:13:05 ↗ with the city it's worked hand-in-hand

1:13:07 ↗ with the city to comply with the code

1:13:09 ↗ it's worked hand-in-hand with the city

1:13:11 ↗ to make sure it's compliant with SEPA

1:13:13 ↗ the project as it sits now is a work in

1:13:17 ↗ process of working with the city to make

1:13:20 ↗ sure it was compliant with the code and

1:13:22 ↗ with all the regulations it is what it

1:13:25 ↗ is now the footprint can't change

1:13:30 ↗ without the project going away so we've

1:13:34 ↗ worked with the city we've been diligent

1:13:38 ↗ with the city and working together it's

1:13:40 ↗ a give-and-take process to make sure

1:13:42 ↗ that we're satisfying the best available

1:13:44 ↗ science and we've hired at great expense

1:13:47 ↗ engineers scientists to look at it and

1:13:49 ↗ provide information to you guys the

1:13:54 ↗ other suggestion that we don't have

1:13:55 ↗ enough information it has to go back

1:13:57 ↗ somewhere and look again I want you guys

1:14:00 ↗ to know that every time that happens

1:14:02 ↗ it's thousands of dollars if not tens of

1:14:04 ↗ thousands of dollars that occur on two

1:14:07 ↗ fronts one hiring people to provide

1:14:10 ↗ information that but to the construction

1:14:13 ↗ delays are terrible construction costs

1:14:17 ↗ continue to go up every time your Glade

1:14:19 ↗ it's a significant you spend so that's

1:14:23 ↗ my two points is the process is

1:14:27 ↗ important but the process needs to be

1:14:29 ↗ concluded so that this project can have

1:14:32 ↗ a decision

1:14:33 ↗ and that we have worked together and the

1:14:37 ↗ compromise is is where we are right now

1:14:39 ↗ thank you

1:14:46 ↗ in other comments

1:15:06 ↗ hello

1:15:08 ↗ I'm Janet wall and I live at two-two

1:15:13 ↗ seven-four-zero South East 56th Street

1:15:15 ↗ in Issaquah I've lived there for about

1:15:18 ↗ 25 years although I am a member of the

1:15:22 ↗ river and streams board I am speaking

1:15:24 ↗ tonight as an in Issaquah resident I am

1:15:28 ↗ also a retired fisheries biologist and a

1:15:32 ↗ volunteer doing habitat restoration my

1:15:37 ↗ concern is that the salmon bearing water

1:15:39 ↗ course identified as a tributary to the

1:15:42 ↗ North Fork of Issaquah Creek is being

1:15:45 ↗ termed a ditch and as such it would have

1:15:48 ↗ no protected buffer the Evergreen Fort

1:15:52 ↗ Ford proposed development would we move

1:15:55 ↗ all but one of the trees on the lot and

1:15:57 ↗ almost all of the large lot would be an

1:16:00 ↗ impervious surface either the large

1:16:03 ↗ added auto dealership building or paved

1:16:07 ↗ parking lot the stormwater runoff from

1:16:11 ↗ all this impervious surface is proposed

1:16:13 ↗ to be filtered and treated then released

1:16:16 ↗ in a controlled method through a level

1:16:18 ↗ spreader down a bank into the tributary

1:16:23 ↗ presumably although it I didn't see any

1:16:26 ↗ notice of this in the plans a curb or

1:16:31 ↗ wall at the edge of the parking lot

1:16:33 ↗ would prevent water from a heavy rain

1:16:36 ↗ from spilling the water over the banks

1:16:41 ↗ into either the North Fork or the

1:16:43 ↗ tributary and instead would funnel the

1:16:47 ↗ water this is what it should do it would

1:16:50 ↗ funnel the water into the treatment

1:16:52 ↗ control distribution system but I

1:16:56 ↗ haven't as they say I if there was in

1:16:58 ↗ the plans I didn't see it part of the

1:17:01 ↗ tributaries banks were vegetated as part

1:17:06 ↗ of the wash culvert project but it

1:17:09 ↗ appears and they pointed out that the

1:17:13 ↗ area

1:17:16 ↗ that part of the that bank of the

1:17:19 ↗ tributary wasn't revegetated and at one

1:17:26 ↗ time they proposed doing that when I

1:17:30 ↗ asked last night whether they still plan

1:17:32 ↗ to restore the banks of the tributary

1:17:34 ↗ the answer I received was that they

1:17:36 ↗ initially had considered this but they

1:17:39 ↗ had backed away from doing this as they

1:17:41 ↗ would have to get washed out spur

1:17:42 ↗ mission to amend their plantings on wash

1:17:46 ↗ dots land I'm concerned about erosion

1:17:51 ↗ from the stormwater discharge into the

1:17:54 ↗ tributary wash dot spent a lot of money

1:17:59 ↗ improving the culvert for the north

1:18:01 ↗ floor and the tributary fish are using

1:18:05 ↗ this tributary and I'm worried that all

1:18:10 ↗ that storm water spilling over into

1:18:15 ↗ poorly vegetated Bank is going to cause

1:18:21 ↗ erosion I also AM concerned that I I

1:18:28 ↗ couldn't find any information about how

1:18:30 ↗ the applicant attends to meet the tree

1:18:32 ↗ retention requirements especially since

1:18:36 ↗ they are backing off doing amendments to

1:18:39 ↗ the washed out plantings so I've seen

1:18:43 ↗ know how they are going to compensate

1:18:46 ↗ for the cutting down all those trees I

1:18:49 ↗ also believe in compromise I believe

1:18:52 ↗ they should be allowed to develop the

1:18:54 ↗ site however I feel that Evergreen Ford

1:18:59 ↗ should at least revegetate amend those

1:19:05 ↗ plantings that wash dot did especially

1:19:08 ↗ on a good portion of the area where it

1:19:11 ↗ looked at that the level spreader was

1:19:15 ↗ going to deposit the stormwater they

1:19:19 ↗ also need to abide by the tree ordinance

1:19:23 ↗ better yet and I also would like to see

1:19:28 ↗ some kind of

1:19:29 ↗ recognition of that bank of the stream

1:19:33 ↗ and hopefully both banks as being an

1:19:37 ↗ official buffer so that there will not

1:19:40 ↗ be any further incursions into that

1:19:45 ↗ stream buffer I also as I say I believe

1:19:52 ↗ in compromise I believe that that they

1:19:54 ↗ have that they can still develop but I

1:19:59 ↗ would like to see a little bit more

1:20:01 ↗ compensation to avoid having any damage

1:20:07 ↗ to that Creek thank you

1:20:25 ↗ final call if you feel compelled this is

1:20:27 ↗ your time seeing no movement will close

1:20:34 ↗ the public portion of this meeting and

1:20:36 ↗ open the floor for the commissioners to

1:20:40 ↗ have their asked questions or discussion

1:20:46 ↗ could we have an update on what the

1:20:49 ↗ rivers and streams board said I think

1:20:52 ↗ you guys said you would explain that as

1:20:53 ↗ part of the CPI discussion so at the at

1:21:00 ↗ the meeting yesterday the applicant gave

1:21:02 ↗ a very similar presentation to them and

1:21:06 ↗ I also gave a very similar presentation

1:21:07 ↗ to them and we took public comment and

1:21:12 ↗ the rivers and stream board recognized

1:21:17 ↗ their role as advisors in the process

1:21:20 ↗ and asked some questions I don't know if

1:21:25 ↗ I I mean there wasn't they didn't make a

1:21:27 ↗ decision they asked some questions about

1:21:30 ↗ how that the applicant had studied the

1:21:34 ↗ water sources and how they had

1:21:37 ↗ determined that it was a ditch and not a

1:21:40 ↗ stream and do you know I'm trying to

1:21:48 ↗ remember the questions

1:21:51 ↗ well because rivers and streams

1:21:57 ↗ contributes to the CEPA decision many of

1:22:04 ↗ the revisions that you see there are

1:22:06 ↗ reflecting things that they commented on

1:22:10 ↗ so concerns about whether we could as MS

1:22:16 ↗ wall mentioned whether we could have

1:22:19 ↗ additional plantings in the washed out

1:22:21 ↗ property so there is a request not a

1:22:26 ↗ requirement because we can't force them

1:22:28 ↗ to plant on property that they do not

1:22:31 ↗ have a right to plant on but that was

1:22:34 ↗ added into the condition

1:22:41 ↗ they're one of the public comments that

1:22:43 ↗ came up yesterday had to do with

1:22:45 ↗ temporary impacts to salmon during

1:22:47 ↗ construction and that so we discussed

1:22:50 ↗ that with the board and that was what

1:22:53 ↗ fed into the the part of the CP

1:22:56 ↗ condition that required some additional

1:22:58 ↗ temporary sediment control measures is

1:23:04 ↗ there any discussion of additional

1:23:05 ↗ buffering rivers and streams was that

1:23:09 ↗ brought up or did they have an opinion

1:23:10 ↗ on that in regard to the tributary area

1:23:13 ↗ under C by authority to do that well not

1:23:19 ↗ under seat by I think they would liked

1:23:21 ↗ to have treated it as a stream but I

1:23:25 ↗ think they generally understood the

1:23:28 ↗ basis with which we had presented it

1:23:31 ↗ based on the current code and and so did

1:23:38 ↗ not recommend additional landscape area

1:23:44 ↗ we spent quite a while talking about the

1:23:46 ↗ kinds of trees that were planted and

1:23:49 ↗ that there was concurrence that vine

1:23:54 ↗ maples did not really qualify as trees

1:23:57 ↗ and that we needed to pick a different

1:23:59 ↗ native tree that would be more

1:24:03 ↗ appropriate in that area so I tend the

1:24:08 ↗ rivers and streams board meeting last

1:24:10 ↗ night as well one of the three comments

1:24:13 ↗ that came up I think from this wall was

1:24:15 ↗ that that Cedars western red cedars

1:24:17 ↗ would not be a good choice because of

1:24:19 ↗ the propensity to died during droughts I

1:24:23 ↗ think and I think there was a comment

1:24:25 ↗ from the applicants and sold was about

1:24:26 ↗ be changing the landscaping plan in

1:24:31 ↗ terms of the tree selection to mark Doug

1:24:32 ↗ firs instead of western red cedars it

1:24:36 ↗ was another comment that came up that I

1:24:38 ↗ had a question about was a mention of

1:24:41 ↗ whether the tributary ditch could be a

1:24:45 ↗ salmon bearing stream renaud and I

1:24:47 ↗ thought

1:24:47 ↗ I heard a comment Watershed that it was

1:24:50 ↗ too shallow of a slope too flat if Greg

1:24:57 ↗ could you come up to the microphone

1:24:59 ↗ please and please introduce yourself oh

1:25:02 ↗ yeah my name is Greg Johnston from the

1:25:04 ↗ watershed company and I'm serving as the

1:25:07 ↗ the city's peer reviewer and the comment

1:25:11 ↗ was specifically regarding just two

1:25:12 ↗ spawning habitats not habitats in

1:25:14 ↗ general so that the the gradient I

1:25:17 ↗ believe is too low there it's too flat

1:25:20 ↗ to maintain good spawning conditions

1:25:23 ↗ which is good spawning gravel with the

1:25:25 ↗ worst of the water can flow through the

1:25:27 ↗ gravel which is needed to incubate the

1:25:28 ↗ eggs it's my view that that tributary

1:25:33 ↗ can't function as some honored fish

1:25:36 ↗ habitat which but more in terms of

1:25:38 ↗ rearing and refuge habitat and it's been

1:25:41 ↗ brought up here a couple times that the

1:25:42 ↗ stream is seasonal so there's no water

1:25:45 ↗ there in this summer except it's going a

1:25:50 ↗ little more detail but given that it's

1:25:51 ↗ stormwater fed from detention ponds up

1:25:53 ↗ on upon the plateau that there is

1:25:57 ↗ Highlands is that you can't have summer

1:26:00 ↗ storm events that would cause this ditch

1:26:02 ↗ to flow on and off through the summer

1:26:04 ↗ whereas a natural drainage probably

1:26:08 ↗ wouldn't do that so you might come along

1:26:10 ↗ after a summer storm and find there's

1:26:12 ↗ flow there for a few days or a day or

1:26:14 ↗ two which which you wouldn't necessarily

1:26:16 ↗ see in a more natural stream and I'm

1:26:18 ↗ getting a little off the subject but

1:26:20 ↗ just in general the kind of habitat that

1:26:24 ↗ this would support would be rearing and

1:26:27 ↗ refuge habitat for juvenile fish mostly

1:26:30 ↗ so the idea is is that you have a storm

1:26:33 ↗ event in the winter and the fish need a

1:26:36 ↗ quiet area to get out of the

1:26:38 ↗ fast-flowing flows whether it be in the

1:26:41 ↗ say in the North Fork of Issaquah Creek

1:26:42 ↗ they're finding a refuge which is the

1:26:44 ↗ same kind of quiet flow and also coho

1:26:48 ↗ salmon in particular they rear in

1:26:50 ↗ freshwater for a full year

1:26:52 ↗ they'll hatches fry and usually around

1:26:55 ↗ April of a year then I'll stay in

1:26:57 ↗ freshwater for an entire year and then

1:26:58 ↗ go to see the following

1:27:00 ↗ April and during that one winter that

1:27:02 ↗ they're in fresh water that the

1:27:05 ↗ temperatures are low they have low

1:27:07 ↗ energy because of the low in order

1:27:09 ↗ because of the low temperature and their

1:27:11 ↗ sir they're looking for a quiet area to

1:27:14 ↗ spend that winter winter such as I think

1:27:16 ↗ the best example I can give would be

1:27:18 ↗ like a beaver pond habitat is where

1:27:20 ↗ those coho would want to spend that

1:27:21 ↗ winter and I envision this tributary

1:27:25 ↗ ditches we've been calling it as to be

1:27:26 ↗ habitat something like that it's it's

1:27:29 ↗ off the channel it's low energy it does

1:27:33 ↗ have water in the winter whereas it

1:27:34 ↗ doesn't have water in the summer you

1:27:36 ↗ know wouldn't make good summer rearing

1:27:37 ↗ habitat for them because there's no

1:27:38 ↗ water there and if there were water

1:27:40 ↗ there it might it might be warm so

1:27:44 ↗ that's that's the kind of habitat that I

1:27:46 ↗ would envision to be there when it still

1:27:49 ↗ be slow and curious I'm talking about

1:27:51 ↗ like big storm events it could come from

1:27:53 ↗ the highlands down through the drainage

1:27:54 ↗ system into the that tend to be a faster

1:27:58 ↗ drainage sometimes in the winter then it

1:28:01 ↗ would increase the velocity some but

1:28:04 ↗ given that the the slope of the channel

1:28:06 ↗ is so low that the velocities wouldn't

1:28:08 ↗ get too high the water level will come

1:28:10 ↗ up but there will be some velocity there

1:28:12 ↗ but it won't be as high but also the

1:28:13 ↗ refuge even from the North Fork of

1:28:16 ↗ Issaquah Creek right at that location

1:28:17 ↗ it's just coming down a long ravine past

1:28:20 ↗ the gravel pit there and so it's it's

1:28:23 ↗ possible that fish would be looking for

1:28:25 ↗ a refuge even from the North Fork of

1:28:27 ↗ Issaquah Creek and that's why you know

1:28:32 ↗ they would seek that I think a comment

1:28:33 ↗ was made earlier about well can't we

1:28:35 ↗ keep the fish out of the ditch because

1:28:36 ↗ keep them in the creek implied where

1:28:39 ↗ they belong but I think it's a good idea

1:28:42 ↗ to let them make the choice if they have

1:28:44 ↗ access to the ditch if they don't like

1:28:46 ↗ the habitat they like they have to have

1:28:47 ↗ better in the North Fork of Issaquah

1:28:48 ↗ Creek they can stay there but I don't

1:28:50 ↗ see any problem with with letting them

1:28:52 ↗ choose and expand and to use that

1:28:54 ↗ habitat temporarily as refuge in rearing

1:28:58 ↗ habitat when it's suitable and as long

1:29:00 ↗ as there's good access to and from they

1:29:02 ↗ can they can get out of there in the

1:29:03 ↗ spring when the flows go down - though

1:29:06 ↗ but they can make good use of it and

1:29:08 ↗ throughout the winter

1:29:09 ↗ I can ask you one more question sure but

1:29:12 ↗ we had received a comment that mentioned

1:29:14 ↗ the possibility of planting larger trees

1:29:20 ↗ along the property boundary with the

1:29:23 ↗ ditch portion the d-o-t portion instead

1:29:27 ↗ of small trees that would take years to

1:29:29 ↗ grow up a pregnant planning like 12-foot

1:29:32 ↗ trees are taller is there their benefit

1:29:34 ↗ to that is a given species just just

1:29:38 ↗ planting larger specimens not I just to

1:29:41 ↗ clarify it's it's not necessarily a

1:29:43 ↗ species that will grow the bigger but

1:29:44 ↗ just in the final three instead of a one

1:29:47 ↗ yeah well you just you just save

1:29:49 ↗ yourself you know whatever time that is

1:29:51 ↗ if it's a you know if it's a eight or

1:29:54 ↗ ten or twelve foot tree they're you know

1:29:56 ↗ they're pretty pricey when you you gain

1:29:58 ↗ that much time you know they'll reach

1:30:00 ↗ they'll reach maturity quicker one note

1:30:04 ↗ though is we've kind of gone back and

1:30:06 ↗ forth on this so how important the

1:30:07 ↗ shading the temperature is given that

1:30:09 ↗ it's a seasonal stream the shade is not

1:30:10 ↗ that important when there's no water in

1:30:12 ↗ the stream you don't really need shade

1:30:14 ↗ in the winter because the temperatures

1:30:15 ↗ are not high and if the summer if the

1:30:17 ↗ channel is dry well the shade isn't

1:30:19 ↗ really providing much protection

1:30:21 ↗ temperature-wise but given that this is

1:30:24 ↗ a storm water fed system like I said it

1:30:27 ↗ it could have flow occasionally in the

1:30:29 ↗ summer due to storm events rainfall

1:30:34 ↗ events and you know given given that

1:30:36 ↗ it's stormwater and it's fed by

1:30:37 ↗ impervious surfaces that it could have

1:30:40 ↗ some flow in the summer so there's there

1:30:41 ↗ some limited benefit to having shade

1:30:44 ↗ that this is a you know it's an unusual

1:30:46 ↗ stream it's it's not like a normal

1:30:48 ↗ printing or a normal seasonal stream

1:30:52 ↗ which would tend to dry up for you know

1:30:55 ↗ several months at a time perhaps but I

1:30:57 ↗ think this this channel could have some

1:31:01 ↗ flow off and on throughout the summer

1:31:02 ↗ that wouldn't be typical of a normal

1:31:04 ↗ seasonal stream can I add one piece well

1:31:09 ↗ two pieces one the joint property line

1:31:14 ↗ is on the north side of the ditch so

1:31:16 ↗ there's a question about how much shade

1:31:19 ↗ I mean I suppose certain trees once they

1:31:21 ↗ grow up

1:31:22 ↗ my arch over the other is that studies

1:31:27 ↗ have generally shown that smaller trees

1:31:30 ↗ not little tiny trees but smaller trees

1:31:35 ↗ and in the size of sort of our minimum

1:31:37 ↗ requirements actually are less shocked

1:31:40 ↗ and so even if you put in a big tree it

1:31:43 ↗ will be shocked longer and so oh but at

1:31:46 ↗ the end of five years or so they're

1:31:48 ↗ about the same size but you may have

1:31:51 ↗ less mortality of the smaller tree so

1:31:54 ↗ while I agree with what where you're

1:31:56 ↗ trying to get to I'm not sure that some

1:31:59 ↗ of the studies have borne out that

1:32:00 ↗ planting a bigger tree will get you to a

1:32:03 ↗ more mature tree more quickly thank you

1:32:08 ↗ excuse me following question I'm sorry

1:32:10 ↗ mr. Damon is it mr. Johnston yeah yes I

1:32:14 ↗ had a question on the watershed report

1:32:17 ↗ it's in the staff report on page 250 or

1:32:19 ↗ 476 and in this area you're referring to

1:32:23 ↗ the macro invertebrate population as

1:32:27 ↗ food source for foraging salmonids you

1:32:31 ↗ quote a source by a sweeney 2014

1:32:33 ↗ in conclusion most available data based

1:32:36 ↗ on replicated control studies suggest

1:32:39 ↗ that a stream side forest of greater

1:32:42 ↗ than or equal to 30 meters is needed to

1:32:45 ↗ protect and maintain fish communities in

1:32:47 ↗ a natural or near natural state and

1:32:49 ↗ these macro invertebrates right or the

1:32:51 ↗ primary food source for rearing salmon

1:32:54 ↗ is entering yeah that would be like the

1:32:55 ↗ aquatic insects so juvenile salmon feed

1:32:58 ↗ primarily on right so although you

1:33:02 ↗ indicated that impacts on water quality

1:33:06 ↗ and shading were negligible or minor I

1:33:10 ↗ don't see how that requirement for macro

1:33:13 ↗ invertebrate driving would be addressed

1:33:16 ↗ by anything I've seen in the report yeah

1:33:21 ↗ I'm not sure I have a really good answer

1:33:23 ↗ for you I guess one distinction to is

1:33:26 ↗ back to the seasonal versus perennial

1:33:31 ↗ Channel or streams is that well

1:33:34 ↗ these macroinvertebrates require

1:33:36 ↗ year-round flow there's only certain

1:33:38 ↗ ones that can can work seasonally like

1:33:41 ↗ that in other words they have to move in

1:33:43 ↗ lay their eggs and grow to maturity and

1:33:45 ↗ get out before you know before the next

1:33:48 ↗ summer because it because it dries up so

1:33:50 ↗ I I would tend to downplay that

1:33:56 ↗ requirement or that function of the

1:33:59 ↗ especially wide buffer for this

1:34:02 ↗ particular intermittent or seasonal

1:34:05 ↗ stream that the reference you read talks

1:34:07 ↗ about streams you know in a broader

1:34:09 ↗ sense in general and I think it would be

1:34:12 ↗ more applicable to a a perennial or a

1:34:14 ↗ year-round stream so you're saying that

1:34:18 ↗ when there is sufficient water in this

1:34:21 ↗ stream that preserving the macro

1:34:24 ↗ invertebrate population would be

1:34:25 ↗ important but at times that the stream

1:34:28 ↗ does not hold water would not be

1:34:29 ↗ important yeah something like that part

1:34:32 ↗ mostly what I'm saying is there and I

1:34:34 ↗ don't know a lot of the details but

1:34:36 ↗ there are a lot of insects that require

1:34:40 ↗ a longer period in the stream to mature

1:34:42 ↗ than just than just one wet season they

1:34:45 ↗ they will be there that they need to be

1:34:48 ↗ there in the summer season as well to

1:34:50 ↗ complete their life history and and and

1:34:53 ↗ to be productive so you get less

1:34:56 ↗ production out of a seasonal stream in

1:34:57 ↗ terms of macro invertebrates the the the

1:35:00 ↗ insects that use it have to move in

1:35:02 ↗ quickly breed grow to maturity provide

1:35:04 ↗ food for the salmon and and get out of

1:35:06 ↗ there you know before the next dry

1:35:08 ↗ season whereas if it flows year-round

1:35:10 ↗ they have a lot longer to establish

1:35:13 ↗ their populations and and be a

1:35:15 ↗ productive food source for the fish okay

1:35:17 ↗ thank you

1:35:24 ↗ other comments questions commissioners a

1:35:29 ↗ question for the applicant first of all

1:35:31 ↗ thank you for the public comment and the

1:35:34 ↗ presentation the diagrams were greatly

1:35:35 ↗ appreciated question regarding the

1:35:38 ↗ stormwater dispersion trench what is the

1:35:41 ↗ risk if any regarding erosion there was

1:35:46 ↗ a comment earlier that hinted to that

1:35:49 ↗ and I'm just curious what the answer is

1:35:53 ↗ there thank you yeah so again Tyrell

1:35:55 ↗ Bradley project civil engineer the

1:35:59 ↗ dispersion trench is a hundred feet long

1:36:02 ↗ the peak flow at the 100-year storm

1:36:05 ↗ event so the peak storm event that we

1:36:08 ↗ would be designed to is point zero sorry

1:36:11 ↗ 0.3 cubic feet per second of water which

1:36:14 ↗ is about a hundred and twenty gallons

1:36:16 ↗ per minute once spread out over the

1:36:18 ↗ entire 100-foot flow spreader ends up

1:36:20 ↗ being about an eighth inch of water

1:36:22 ↗ cresting that flow spreader over that

1:36:25 ↗ hundred feet so it it really the

1:36:27 ↗ velocities of the water will be slim to

1:36:30 ↗ none it's going across two percent slope

1:36:32 ↗ for about twenty feet before entering

1:36:35 ↗ the top of bank and going down to the

1:36:37 ↗ ordinary high water mark so we are not

1:36:39 ↗ talking about any sort of scour of this

1:36:42 ↗ water as it leaves the level spreader

1:36:44 ↗ thank you what about I guess there could

1:36:51 ↗ be storms or probably will be storms

1:36:53 ↗ that are in excess of the detention

1:36:55 ↗ correct it's what happens in an

1:36:58 ↗ emergency situation so that anything

1:36:59 ↗ greater than the 100-year storm event

1:37:02 ↗ which would be a 500-year event will hit

1:37:05 ↗ the bypass and and just overflowed you

1:37:08 ↗ know the same way the rest of the storm

1:37:10 ↗ water overflows through that level

1:37:11 ↗ spreader okay so it'll just be increased

1:37:13 ↗ flow a plume yeah and I believe the

1:37:15 ↗ 500-year storm event I don't have it

1:37:17 ↗ offhand but I think it's like 1 CFS I

1:37:20 ↗ think 0.3 was the 100-year 1 CFS it's

1:37:23 ↗ like a exponential increase it's not

1:37:25 ↗ linear as I'm sure you know but I will

1:37:30 ↗ say at the 500 year storm event the

1:37:32 ↗ entire city will be underwater so

1:37:34 ↗ I don't know if you'll be driving by

1:37:36 ↗ worrying about the safe you'll be ruined

1:37:38 ↗ by the the entire site would be all the

1:37:47 ↗ water that comes down on the site would

1:37:49 ↗ go into the system

1:37:51 ↗ all right that's correct okay and then

1:37:53 ↗ anywhere where there's not like a curb

1:37:56 ↗ cut for cars to drive through would

1:37:57 ↗ everything be curbed along the

1:38:00 ↗ especially along the ditch edge there

1:38:02 ↗ yes prevent any water from yes the

1:38:04 ↗ entire exterior of the site will be

1:38:06 ↗ curbed to contain all water within the

1:38:08 ↗ site and it had the previous public

1:38:11 ↗ comment I'm sorry if it wasn't clear on

1:38:12 ↗ the plan but it all does get channelized

1:38:14 ↗ to the modular wetland system via curbs

1:38:17 ↗ and then you sort of describe what would

1:38:21 ↗ if we looked at the whole site and all

1:38:23 ↗ the rainfall that would come down on it

1:38:25 ↗ generally where it sits now where would

1:38:28 ↗ all that go now and presumably

1:38:32 ↗ afterwards it would all go through this

1:38:34 ↗ spreader and come out yeah yeah

1:38:36 ↗ absolutely

1:38:36 ↗ so right now and this is actually a part

1:38:40 ↗ of Department of Ecology requirement

1:38:41 ↗ that I have to go through as a

1:38:42 ↗ stormwater designer right now the

1:38:44 ↗ stormwater discharges in this area

1:38:47 ↗ naturally flowing over the gravel that

1:38:50 ↗ the field I will say and discharges in

1:38:53 ↗ this area so when we picked a discharge

1:38:54 ↗ location as part of the requirement I

1:38:57 ↗ have to discharge the water in the exact

1:38:59 ↗ as close as you can to the same spot so

1:39:01 ↗ you're not trading basins so that's why

1:39:03 ↗ we placed the level spreader in that

1:39:04 ↗ location was to maintain the basin

1:39:06 ↗ discharge so the majority or all of the

1:39:09 ↗ water generally from the improved site

1:39:11 ↗ is already coming to that to that did

1:39:14 ↗ that's correct okay but it would come

1:39:16 ↗ through the retention system yes through

1:39:20 ↗ altered treatment attention level

1:39:23 ↗ spreaded released yes thank you is that

1:39:27 ↗ system on backup power I've been only

1:39:31 ↗ here a year but you know it's from time

1:39:33 ↗ to time we do lose power I'm just

1:39:35 ↗ curious what if that system is on backup

1:39:37 ↗ power I would need to ask the owner on

1:39:42 ↗ whether or not they will have a backup

1:39:43 ↗ power source I do not know the

1:39:46 ↗ to that okay sorry just one more so the

1:39:52 ↗ new vegetated strip in the CEPA

1:39:54 ↗ condition what's the width of that did

1:39:56 ↗ you say that's about seven feet just

1:39:58 ↗ above the level spreader area that's

1:40:01 ↗ correct yeah the space from the edge of

1:40:03 ↗ the level spreader to the property feet

1:40:06 ↗ and how far does it run linearly yeah it

1:40:12 ↗ starts down here and then runs all the

1:40:16 ↗ way up around the corner

1:40:19 ↗ can you I'm not sure you two are talking

1:40:21 ↗ about the same thing were you asking

1:40:23 ↗ about the level spreader no that's great

1:40:27 ↗ super condition one I just wanted to

1:40:29 ↗ make sure I'm not sure who the best to

1:40:34 ↗ answer this question or a couple of them

1:40:36 ↗ one would be who maintains the d-o-t

1:40:39 ↗ properties the questions came up her

1:40:41 ↗ comments came up about the d-o-t project

1:40:45 ↗ now having blackberries and other

1:40:48 ↗ invasive species growing in it and is

1:40:51 ↗ the is the d-o-t responsible for

1:40:53 ↗ maintaining that if they don't do it is

1:40:56 ↗ there enforcement so I'm gonna make a

1:41:01 ↗ general comment and then I'm going to

1:41:03 ↗ look to the applicant because we've had

1:41:06 ↗ some obviously some misunderstandings

1:41:08 ↗ about what their agreement with watch

1:41:10 ↗ that is in general each property owners

1:41:12 ↗ responsible for their own property and

1:41:15 ↗ what I'm the public comment that was

1:41:19 ↗ made I'm not sure you know there was the

1:41:22 ↗ two different greens that showed the

1:41:24 ↗ area where wash dot had worked on the

1:41:27 ↗ ditch and then the rest of the property

1:41:30 ↗ that was untouched I made an assumption

1:41:34 ↗ that that was the area the untouched

1:41:37 ↗ area was where the blackberries in

1:41:41 ↗ deadly nightshade that were referenced

1:41:43 ↗ but I don't personally know that I hope

1:41:49 ↗ that maybe someone from the applicant

1:41:50 ↗ can speak about if they have a role in

1:41:53 ↗ maintaining any of the wash dot

1:41:57 ↗ things that were part of their project

1:42:06 ↗ my name is Eric Hanson I'm the owners

1:42:08 ↗ rep on that project so the plantings

1:42:11 ↗ that were done by waz dot the plantings

1:42:13 ↗ that we're done by waz dot are

1:42:15 ↗ maintained by waz dot okay I presume

1:42:21 ↗ that we don't really have any control

1:42:22 ↗ over was that if they they don't

1:42:24 ↗ maintain something and over grows it

1:42:26 ↗ just over grows and property there was a

1:42:32 ↗ question that came up last night too

1:42:33 ↗ about the maintenance of the of any of

1:42:38 ↗ the planting something about after two

1:42:39 ↗ years the city maintains but I didn't

1:42:43 ↗ catch what that was or was it the

1:42:45 ↗ stormwater system so I'm I'm gonna

1:42:53 ↗ answer about just plantings in general

1:42:55 ↗ then maybe I don't know whether maybe

1:42:58 ↗ Doug

1:42:59 ↗ should answer so just because you're

1:43:03 ↗ asking about various maintenance pieces

1:43:05 ↗ so the city obviously requires that the

1:43:10 ↗ plantings that are approved whether it's

1:43:13 ↗ for mitigation or for just general

1:43:16 ↗ landscape planting we have a performance

1:43:20 ↗ bond to ensure that the plantings are

1:43:22 ↗ installed then for just regular

1:43:24 ↗ plantings they have to be maintained for

1:43:27 ↗ three years and then we do another

1:43:29 ↗ inspection to make sure that they've

1:43:32 ↗ essentially established however in a

1:43:35 ↗ critical area as part of a mitigation

1:43:38 ↗ plan it's actually a five-year

1:43:40 ↗ monitoring period so that's just the

1:43:45 ↗ landscape piece I think you may have

1:43:48 ↗ been asking about the stormwater system

1:43:50 ↗ that's me when I heard you dug schlepp

1:43:52 ↗ the consultant engineer for the city and

1:43:57 ↗ the stormwater system in question on

1:44:00 ↗ site is proposed to be a private system

1:44:03 ↗ and that would be maintained

1:44:06 ↗ by the owner and I'm not sure if you'd

1:44:11 ↗ asked kind of inspections density so

1:44:15 ↗ we'll be doing inspections during

1:44:18 ↗ construction and then upon completion of

1:44:22 ↗ the project

1:44:23 ↗ the city has staff in the Public Works

1:44:27 ↗ engineering department that goes out

1:44:30 ↗ regularly and within that first year

1:44:33 ↗ they're looking at the facilities the

1:44:36 ↗ private facilities to make sure that

1:44:39 ↗ they're being maintained properly and

1:44:40 ↗ then they will develop a regular

1:44:42 ↗ schedule to inspect those additionally

1:44:46 ↗ there's a covenant that is recorded on

1:44:48 ↗ the property to allow the city staff to

1:44:51 ↗ enter the site and inspect these

1:44:53 ↗ facilities when they see fit thank you

1:45:02 ↗ do you know that planting width on the

1:45:04 ↗ North Fork of wash that's plantings

1:45:07 ↗ does anybody know that so I'm gonna

1:45:12 ↗ answer obliquely so what I would say is

1:45:17 ↗ one of our conditions is that the

1:45:20 ↗ plantings along the North Fork have to I

1:45:26 ↗ think in general the tree and shrub

1:45:29 ↗ planting is consistent with the city

1:45:31 ↗ requirements however there aren't ground

1:45:34 ↗ covers and so the applicant is required

1:45:38 ↗ to complete the planting along the North

1:45:41 ↗ Fork to match our standards I guess do

1:45:46 ↗ you know the width of wash transplanting

1:45:48 ↗ oh oh you mean the actual like from the

1:45:52 ↗ distance you know I think it was like 30

1:45:54 ↗ feet 35 that's less than 75 okay and on

1:46:01 ↗ the other side it was 17 to 24 I believe

1:46:05 ↗ 7 and 24 so just wash God's plantings

1:46:10 ↗ oh yeah it's 24 okay so is there

1:46:13 ↗ anything done by wash dot that is being

1:46:15 ↗ removed by this project No

1:46:23 ↗ another question I guess about the

1:46:25 ↗ impact of lights on the any fish that

1:46:33 ↗ might be in the tributary given that

1:46:37 ↗ cars will be parked along there and so

1:46:40 ↗ forth

1:46:40 ↗ in it it's 25 feet away yeah and I I

1:46:45 ↗ believe we sort of touched on this in

1:46:47 ↗ the last design commission but it's good

1:46:49 ↗ to refresh our memories on it so all of

1:46:51 ↗ the parking lot lighting will be

1:46:52 ↗ shielded with cutoff and I think I'm

1:46:54 ↗ thinking more than just the cars along

1:46:56 ↗ them that we'll be parking along there

1:47:00 ↗ like the headlights as they headlights

1:47:02 ↗ right what I don't think they'll be

1:47:04 ↗ moving any vehicles at nighttime

1:47:06 ↗ that'll be display parking so the cars

1:47:08 ↗ will be parked there during 4 o'clock in

1:47:09 ↗ February still be dark yeah I mean I

1:47:18 ↗ questioned wood lights like that have an

1:47:20 ↗ impact on fish habitat so I know what I

1:47:28 ↗ would say is lighting and fish habitat

1:47:35 ↗ we've been you know we're in the process

1:47:38 ↗ of updating our shoreline master plan

1:47:40 ↗ and we've received some questions about

1:47:44 ↗ that topic and we're working with I know

1:47:50 ↗ the acronym and ipara 8 which is the

1:47:53 ↗ water resource inventory area in which

1:47:56 ↗ it's akua's located and they are

1:47:59 ↗ beginning to explore that topic and what

1:48:05 ↗ standards should be in place in other

1:48:08 ↗ words right now there are aren't

1:48:11 ↗ standards in place and so we don't I'm

1:48:15 ↗ not saying they don't have an impact

1:48:17 ↗ I just don't think those levels have

1:48:19 ↗ been established yet the one standard

1:48:23 ↗ that I'm

1:48:24 ↗ is that things like parking lot lighting

1:48:27 ↗ we the City of LA has a requirement to

1:48:31 ↗ limit light spill at property lines or

1:48:34 ↗ in to critical areas to zero point three

1:48:38 ↗ foot candles and in speaking with the

1:48:41 ↗ Huayra eight representative we are

1:48:43 ↗ probably the only community in their

1:48:46 ↗ area that has that standard so we we are

1:48:52 ↗ applying the limited tools that we have

1:48:55 ↗ but at this point we don't have enough

1:48:57 ↗ information to know or to establish

1:49:00 ↗ another standard The effect of light the

1:49:04 ↗ effect of lights really is increase in

1:49:06 ↗ predation at night for this for the FRA

1:49:08 ↗ and so my guess would be a car light

1:49:14 ↗ flashing on the river would not be real

1:49:17 ↗ and do a real incentive for predators to

1:49:19 ↗ eat a lot of fish the parking lot lights

1:49:23 ↗ would be an issue but as I said they're

1:49:24 ↗ going to shield those okay I would add

1:49:26 ↗ one more comment - is the vehicles will

1:49:29 ↗ be display vehicles and they'll be most

1:49:30 ↗ likely backed in along that entire thing

1:49:32 ↗ because of the vegetation they'll be

1:49:34 ↗ facing towards the dealership question I

1:49:39 ↗ had - would it be would be best to have

1:49:42 ↗ a requirement that all vehicles be

1:49:43 ↗ backed in along that along that border

1:49:47 ↗ if they were likely to be anyway and I

1:49:52 ↗ don't know if you can require some in

1:49:55 ↗ the back of vehicle at all times in but

1:49:57 ↗ I mean a lot of places you'll go like a

1:49:59 ↗ garage or something to sit back in

1:50:00 ↗ parking only and for whatever reasons

1:50:02 ↗ fumes or whatever in this case it may be

1:50:04 ↗ for the oil coming out of an engine so

1:50:09 ↗ we we did add a SEPA condition like

1:50:13 ↗ along the creek along along the ditch to

1:50:18 ↗ have wheel stops or some other mechanism

1:50:21 ↗ to ensure the cars stay out of landscape

1:50:26 ↗ because of the concern that we wouldn't

1:50:30 ↗ want right so here's one of my thoughts

1:50:34 ↗ - I guess so put into the form of a

1:50:37 ↗ question of death again we have a 75

1:50:41 ↗ foot buffer at the North Fork it was

1:50:45 ↗ lots of protection room for any

1:50:48 ↗ incidentals that can make them out of

1:50:49 ↗ the parking lot and so forth here we

1:50:51 ↗ have a 25 to 30 foot 35-foot buffer from

1:50:56 ↗ the ditch seems to me one of the ways

1:51:02 ↗ that we can without losing the parking

1:51:04 ↗ stalls about losing usable area still

1:51:09 ↗ maintaining that buffer but one way to

1:51:10 ↗ help create a better buffer might be to

1:51:13 ↗ create a solid fence it would prevent

1:51:19 ↗ just human nature people getting out of

1:51:21 ↗ car or tossing a cigarette tossing the

1:51:23 ↗ wrapper things like that this ditch is

1:51:26 ↗ pretty close it could be things in there

1:51:28 ↗ I know it's more expensive than a split

1:51:32 ↗ rail fence but if we had say a five foot

1:51:35 ↗ solid fence along that property line it

1:51:38 ↗ seems like it would help us create an

1:51:40 ↗ effectively larger buffer I don't know

1:51:44 ↗ if that's a crazy idea or not but so I

1:51:47 ↗ don't know that it's crazy the the one

1:51:52 ↗ hesitation we would have in our

1:51:54 ↗ experience is that higher more solid

1:51:58 ↗ fences are more likely to encourage

1:52:00 ↗ people dumping things over them well but

1:52:03 ↗ I wouldn't I wouldn't expect I'm not

1:52:05 ↗ saying that never green board would do

1:52:07 ↗ that I'm just saying when things are

1:52:11 ↗ visible people I think tend to respect

1:52:14 ↗ them more so I so I think the question

1:52:19 ↗ might you know you may be questioning

1:52:23 ↗ whether it should be less permeable but

1:52:29 ↗ I'm then a split rail fence would be but

1:52:32 ↗ I don't know that I think it's wise to

1:52:38 ↗ be able to see what's on the other side

1:52:40 ↗ I guess is is part of my concern

1:52:43 ↗ even though so that might be

1:52:47 ↗ more like a alternating boards is

1:52:50 ↗ another option so that you can see what

1:52:53 ↗ is on the other side if people have

1:52:55 ↗ dropped things over there if you need to

1:52:57 ↗ write I would ask if you can see when

1:53:00 ↗ you're off going on the off off-ramp and

1:53:04 ↗ looking over at the Ford dealership can

1:53:05 ↗ you see those cars they're going to be

1:53:07 ↗ able to see those cars and that if if

1:53:09 ↗ you can it would seem like that would be

1:53:12 ↗ part of the value of the location so

1:53:15 ↗ that you could I don't think so I think

1:53:16 ↗ there's too many trees that are I don't

1:53:19 ↗ know the off-ramp there to my bigger

1:53:24 ↗ concern is trying to create an

1:53:26 ↗ effectively larger buffer without taking

1:53:28 ↗ away usable side area I can answer the

1:53:31 ↗ last question because of the arrogant

1:53:32 ↗ because of the elevation coming off the

1:53:34 ↗ off-ramp you can easily see on the

1:53:36 ↗ property and even the ditch down through

1:53:40 ↗ the ditch yeah those would be display

1:53:44 ↗ vehicles that would be seen from the

1:53:46 ↗ off-ramp

1:53:54 ↗ just a clarification on the north creek

1:53:57 ↗ what are this I don't need the exact

1:54:00 ↗ spot elevations but what is that height

1:54:01 ↗ difference between the blue and where

1:54:05 ↗ the Evergreen cars are parked in the

1:54:07 ↗ park installs I'm just trying to

1:54:08 ↗ envision the headlights and whether

1:54:12 ↗ really any shine down on them

1:54:14 ↗ yeah so it's about seven to eight feet

1:54:17 ↗ below the vehicle like to say I share

1:54:25 ↗ Commissioner Morgan's concern about the

1:54:27 ↗ size of the buffer area we're talking

1:54:29 ↗ about here especially in light of the

1:54:31 ↗ watershed report again on pages 249 and

1:54:35 ↗ 250 it's talking about a 33 foot buffer

1:54:40 ↗ can be counted on to remove 67 to a

1:54:42 ↗ hundred percent of sediment and 33% foot

1:54:49 ↗ buffer could be counted on to remove 69

1:54:52 ↗ to 98 percent of nitrogen and phosphorus

1:54:55 ↗ so we're as low as two-thirds of the

1:54:58 ↗ removal rate here and we're very close

1:55:02 ↗ to the used car parking area of this

1:55:05 ↗ display so I'm wondering if there's

1:55:09 ↗ anything else that we can do to enhance

1:55:12 ↗ that area the mitigation in that area we

1:55:15 ↗ only have a six and a half seven foot

1:55:18 ↗ planning strip along here and it seems

1:55:22 ↗ that were barred from going into the

1:55:24 ↗ washed out property but I wonder about

1:55:26 ↗ that is there any creative way that the

1:55:29 ↗ applicant could find to talk to wash got

1:55:32 ↗ in a more meaningful way to allow

1:55:36 ↗ bringing the planning in there up to a

1:55:39 ↗ better quality applicant to have any

1:55:42 ↗ plan or approach to being able to do

1:55:44 ↗ something like that seems like a

1:55:46 ↗ possible kind of compromise to me and

1:55:49 ↗ I'm running out of compromises otherwise

1:55:51 ↗ and I really think a compelling case has

1:55:55 ↗ been made for a larger buffer area above

1:55:57 ↗ this tributary yeah I can answer

1:56:01 ↗ answer that question I would like to

1:56:03 ↗ remind the Commission that the water

1:56:06 ↗ coming off of this site will be 100%

1:56:09 ↗ collected treated and then released so

1:56:12 ↗ the riparian area is not needed for the

1:56:15 ↗ water leaving our site obviously it's

1:56:17 ↗ needed for other benefits but the

1:56:19 ↗ stormwater leaving our site will already

1:56:21 ↗ be meeting the the ecology minimum

1:56:25 ↗ standard for release to a stream or to a

1:56:27 ↗ tributary to a stream so I just kind of

1:56:32 ↗ want to remind us of that the I'm sorry

1:56:35 ↗ I missed the second point of that

1:56:37 ↗ question now how to work with washed-out

1:56:39 ↗ yes get them to allow bringing the

1:56:42 ↗ planning in there up for more so

1:56:44 ↗ unfamiliar thank you so unwashed I

1:56:46 ↗ completed this work they left it at the

1:56:49 ↗ standard that they coordinated with US

1:56:53 ↗ Fish and Wildlife and Washington Fish

1:56:55 ↗ and Wildlife so that was peer reviewed

1:56:57 ↗ by WDFW and US Fish and Wildlife and

1:56:59 ↗ they found it to be adequate at the time

1:57:01 ↗ that they left the project the riparian

1:57:03 ↗ areas that they left we are not having

1:57:07 ↗ any impact to the watchtower riparian

1:57:09 ↗ areas therefore asking washed-out to do

1:57:12 ↗ additional plantings in there is

1:57:13 ↗ actually asking washed-out to increase

1:57:14 ↗ their maintenance of that area which

1:57:18 ↗ they already found adequate when they

1:57:20 ↗ left so we I guess I'll leave it at that

1:57:23 ↗ I think there's a slight

1:57:25 ↗ misunderstanding and maybe the watershed

1:57:27 ↗ engineer can elaborate but I think that

1:57:31 ↗ those percent reductions were if the

1:57:34 ↗ buffer is being used for treatment is

1:57:36 ↗ that correct and this water is treated

1:57:40 ↗ before it hits the buffer yeah I think

1:57:42 ↗ that's the implication is that the water

1:57:45 ↗ would be seeping through the buffer

1:57:48 ↗ towards this dream you start with

1:57:50 ↗ possibly somewhat polluted water towards

1:57:52 ↗ the outside of the buffer and it seeps

1:57:54 ↗ towards the stream and it it receives

1:57:56 ↗ this you know reduction in influence and

1:58:02 ↗ cleaning in the process but as has just

1:58:04 ↗ been said the existing site is already

1:58:07 ↗ impacted and this is this is a much

1:58:09 ↗ improved

1:58:10 ↗ water quality over the existing

1:58:12 ↗ condition and I don't know whether staff

1:58:14 ↗ wants to point out the distinction of

1:58:17 ↗ all those buffers you know you know

1:58:21 ↗ buffer efficiency numbers that are in

1:58:24 ↗ the report there those are all geared

1:58:25 ↗ towards stream buffers and achieving a

1:58:29 ↗ high level of habitat function

1:58:32 ↗ regardless of how degraded the stream is

1:58:35 ↗ now but my understanding and is getting

1:58:38 ↗ to the staff can corroborate this is

1:58:40 ↗ that SEPA is measuring things against

1:58:44 ↗ existing conditions not against what you

1:58:48 ↗ know higher level of function might be

1:58:50 ↗ so the this the CPEC threshold is you

1:58:55 ↗ know are we making things better or

1:58:58 ↗ worse based on the existing condition

1:59:01 ↗ right and those numbers then that you

1:59:04 ↗ provided are those based on a condition

1:59:06 ↗ which there's no water treatment or a

1:59:08 ↗ condition in which there is treatment I

1:59:11 ↗ I don't know the answer to that directly

1:59:14 ↗ that's part of the best available

1:59:16 ↗ science literature of establishing

1:59:18 ↗ stream buffers in general with the idea

1:59:21 ↗ of you know getting back to a very high

1:59:24 ↗ level of function of habitats again

1:59:29 ↗ keeping in mind that this is an a

1:59:32 ↗ seasonal seasonal flow that's that's one

1:59:36 ↗ aspect of it okay good-evening

1:59:42 ↗ Development Commission Keith Nevin so a

1:59:46 ↗ couple things one is the applicant has

1:59:50 ↗ told me that he's more than willing to

1:59:52 ↗ talk to wash dot about additional

1:59:55 ↗ plantings you can't guarantee it because

1:59:58 ↗ he can't speak for washed out but he's I

2:00:01 ↗ think he's already stated that he's not

2:00:06 ↗ trying to impact any environment and if

2:00:09 ↗ the Commission feels like that's an

2:00:10 ↗ important piece of an outcome he's

2:00:13 ↗ willing to do that as a voluntary

2:00:16 ↗ measure to respond to concerns raised by

2:00:19 ↗ the Commission to Commissioner Morgan's

2:00:23 ↗ maybe comment earlier something to maybe

2:00:27 ↗ think about I I would agree with Lucy I

2:00:29 ↗ think the split rail fence is

2:00:32 ↗ appropriate for two reasons one for the

2:00:36 ↗ openness but two because your you've got

2:00:38 ↗ this natural edge and I think that's a

2:00:41 ↗ better kind of transition to the project

2:00:44 ↗ from an urban design standpoint and if

2:00:46 ↗ you had a solid higher fence there so a

2:00:51 ↗ question for you might be to consider

2:00:52 ↗ maybe a solid hedgerow that might be

2:00:55 ↗ like half the height of the split rail

2:00:57 ↗ fence to give you a vegetative

2:00:59 ↗ continuous buffer along that fence edge

2:01:02 ↗ so you keep people out but you also get

2:01:05 ↗ some additional vegetation along that

2:01:07 ↗ edge and I think with a five to seven

2:01:09 ↗ foot width that's plenty wide to get a

2:01:12 ↗ hedgerow in so some thinking about so a

2:01:15 ↗ hedge Road like a like boxwood it there

2:01:20 ↗ Landscape Architect is what I would say

2:01:24 ↗ is this you could do a hedgerow of some

2:01:26 ↗ kind

2:01:27 ↗ I like boxwood but they may have a

2:01:30 ↗ different opinion about what an

2:01:32 ↗ appropriate hedgerow for the bottom of

2:01:33 ↗ the split rail fence might look like

2:01:35 ↗ it's called English boxwood for a reason

2:01:38 ↗ [Music]

2:01:43 ↗ I loved in yeah and and I guess my

2:01:49 ↗ question to you would be then is could

2:01:52 ↗ you create a continuous in how tall of a

2:01:55 ↗ hedgerow could you create and for a

2:01:58 ↗ continuous run okay my name is Mark Karr

2:02:01 ↗ from landscape architect for the

2:02:02 ↗ applicant with all due respect hedges

2:02:07 ↗ I don't think make great neighbors if we

2:02:11 ↗ put up a hedge along that that split

2:02:13 ↗ rail fence it just walls people off from

2:02:15 ↗ the buffer and so they can't see into it

2:02:17 ↗ the second point I might make is this is

2:02:21 ↗ a retail business visibility is

2:02:24 ↗ important and we are planting the heck

2:02:26 ↗ out of the buffer already and so adding

2:02:28 ↗ the hedge along the edge I I don't think

2:02:32 ↗ that I don't think that helps with their

2:02:34 ↗ business and I just don't think that

2:02:36 ↗ that any sort of hedge well here let me

2:02:39 ↗ back up there's one plant that excuse me

2:02:44 ↗ that might be appropriate for a hedge

2:02:46 ↗ along here at my it's a Pacific wax

2:02:48 ↗ myrtle it's sort of native to California

2:02:50 ↗ but we don't really have any good

2:02:52 ↗ evergreen plants that would make a

2:02:54 ↗ proper hedge row in this climate no

2:02:57 ↗ native plants I think would be

2:02:59 ↗ appropriate for that Oh could you

2:03:01 ↗ explain to us I guess again my concern

2:03:03 ↗ is that we have a ditch that has small

2:03:07 ↗ nodes in it I got spell pronounced the

2:03:10 ↗ right baby salmon in it at times we want

2:03:13 ↗ to keep the impact out from that

2:03:15 ↗ typically on the other side we create

2:03:17 ↗ the 75 foot buffer keeps people and

2:03:20 ↗ things going on from the North Fork here

2:03:23 ↗ we're not gaining anything we're going

2:03:25 ↗ to losing anything from what we have

2:03:26 ↗ generally property line wise but we're

2:03:29 ↗ putting people in cars right up at the

2:03:31 ↗ property line or within a few feet my

2:03:34 ↗ concern is what can we create in that

2:03:36 ↗ limited space of landscaping be a fence

2:03:39 ↗ or hedge road that in essence blocks

2:03:41 ↗ people from going into there and

2:03:43 ↗ impacting it there's no I'm not worried

2:03:46 ↗ about any crime risk anything like that

2:03:48 ↗ I don't think there's no fairy stuff

2:03:50 ↗ that would go on and the ditch

2:03:52 ↗ the people one see it's more of how can

2:03:54 ↗ we create something that protects baby

2:03:57 ↗ Sam and in that stream from what's going

2:03:59 ↗ on in the parking lot

2:04:00 ↗ be it fence or hedgerow or other

2:04:03 ↗ plantings okay

2:04:05 ↗ how about red twig dogwood and the

2:04:11 ↗ reason I propose that number one it's a

2:04:14 ↗ native plant number two it it grows

2:04:18 ↗ quickly and gets quite tall and it can

2:04:20 ↗ form kind of a dense thicket but it's

2:04:22 ↗ also deciduous and so on the winter it

2:04:23 ↗ drops its leaves and it's got nice stems

2:04:25 ↗ but it's still fairly thick can I can I

2:04:28 ↗ suggest in in the interest of time that

2:04:30 ↗ if if you like that idea if the

2:04:33 ↗ Commission likes that idea and the

2:04:34 ↗ applicant is willing to design that as

2:04:36 ↗ an outcome that whatever particular

2:04:38 ↗ plant type might be part of a later

2:04:42 ↗ landscape plan that gets approved but I

2:04:45 ↗ think what I think what I'm hearing

2:04:46 ↗ there landscape architect's say is there

2:04:49 ↗ is some variety of plant hedge that

2:04:52 ↗ could be combined with the fence to

2:04:57 ↗ achieve both a better visual separation

2:05:01 ↗ as well as a physical separation to

2:05:04 ↗ people getting into the ditch which is

2:05:06 ↗ what the fence was intended to do from

2:05:08 ↗ the get-go so I think so I'm just trying

2:05:11 ↗ to say we don't need to design it here I

2:05:12 ↗ think so if you'd like we could try and

2:05:17 ↗ write some kind of performance standard

2:05:20 ↗ if that's helpful mm-hmm to you okay or

2:05:25 ↗ do you want to write it I know I think

2:05:26 ↗ that that might work and again I want to

2:05:29 ↗ make sure it's not just me that's sure

2:05:31 ↗ you know what's the s I'm not I'm not

2:05:34 ↗ feeling like there needs to be a hedge

2:05:36 ↗ there so I guess I'd be interested in

2:05:38 ↗ the other commissioners input I I'm

2:05:41 ↗ curious the way we can't I know we're

2:05:43 ↗ not designing it here take a plant

2:05:46 ↗ that's just gonna spread down the hill

2:05:48 ↗ all the way of the creek you know plant

2:05:50 ↗ it out for washed out without them

2:05:51 ↗ really being aware of it

2:05:53 ↗ it's allow something that's gonna self

2:05:55 ↗ seed and creep its way down

2:05:57 ↗ if it washed our planet sorry Mike

2:06:03 ↗ foster project biologist I just wanted

2:06:05 ↗ to add a data point that the washed-out

2:06:07 ↗ that currently planted washed out

2:06:09 ↗ riparian area has native rose which is a

2:06:14 ↗ rhizomatous spreading plant spreads

2:06:17 ↗ pretty aggressively and salmon Snowberry

2:06:20 ↗ so it's the small low plant also spreads

2:06:24 ↗ pretty aggressively both native both

2:06:27 ↗ greats will provide screening function

2:06:29 ↗ and and that's currently in that newly

2:06:31 ↗ planted wash dot area so what will be

2:06:34 ↗ the average height of those the washed

2:06:37 ↗ out plantings Snowberry and the native

2:06:40 ↗ rose three to six feet in height and

2:06:45 ↗ that's those are the shrubs that I

2:06:48 ↗ noticed there are also tree species like

2:06:52 ↗ willow and western red cedar I guess I

2:06:58 ↗ would argue that wash dot developed a

2:07:01 ↗ planning a planting plan that was

2:07:05 ↗ satisfactory for fish and wildlife

2:07:07 ↗ both the US Fish and Wildlife and the

2:07:09 ↗ Washington Fish and Wildlife and I'm not

2:07:12 ↗ sure why we would think that it needed

2:07:13 ↗ to be more than that I don't know that

2:07:18 ↗ they imagined there'd be cars parked

2:07:21 ↗ right at the edge of the property in

2:07:23 ↗ essence imagine they did what was best

2:07:27 ↗ for what they had could control

2:07:34 ↗ a question for Commissioner Morgan um

2:07:36 ↗ trying to pinpoint the exact spot you're

2:07:39 ↗ talking about are you referring to where

2:07:42 ↗ the stalls the parking stalls are off

2:07:44 ↗ that 75 foot buffer are you referring to

2:07:47 ↗ the edge of the blue field region where

2:07:49 ↗ it meets up the rows about the tributary

2:07:52 ↗ okay so this is all about the tributary

2:07:54 ↗ okay only that I think the the washed

2:08:06 ↗ out plantings and they're seven foot

2:08:08 ↗ buffer should be sufficient to stop

2:08:10 ↗ headlights intermittent I mean it's not

2:08:13 ↗ like a highway driving by there yeah and

2:08:15 ↗ I guess I'm not as concerned by the

2:08:16 ↗ headlights just more of the ability of

2:08:19 ↗ people to I'm shopping for a car with my

2:08:22 ↗ young kids and they say like there's a

2:08:24 ↗ creek down there I'm gonna go play with

2:08:27 ↗ ya and I guess my concern is about

2:08:30 ↗ detention of all the runoff it's great

2:08:32 ↗ if it's 100 percent system that never

2:08:35 ↗ fails and it's well-maintained and all

2:08:36 ↗ that but I've concerns about it several

2:08:39 ↗ years down the road or a case of case of

2:08:42 ↗ a spill or an inadvertent on planned for

2:08:46 ↗ event it seems like and correct me if

2:08:52 ↗ I'm wrong that there all that parking

2:08:54 ↗ along that ditch I mean it looks like

2:08:58 ↗ you've got a couple parking islands

2:09:00 ↗ which I assume will have landscape on

2:09:01 ↗ them and there really is no sidewalk

2:09:04 ↗ there is that correct

2:09:05 ↗ is there a sidewalk Oh anywhere along

2:09:07 ↗ there is it just all stalls it's just aa

2:09:09 ↗ stalls that's just record and there are

2:09:10 ↗ two planners that bisect those stalls

2:09:14 ↗ okay

2:09:16 ↗ so it's possible that the employees on

2:09:19 ↗ their time off for example I mean they

2:09:21 ↗ may not even be in that area right I

2:09:22 ↗ mean they may kind of hang out or take

2:09:27 ↗ their breaks elsewhere and it seems like

2:09:30 ↗ the opportunity for walkability in that

2:09:33 ↗ area is somewhat limited as well once

2:09:36 ↗ you have those tandem tandem stalls laid

2:09:39 ↗ out like that that's correct and there

2:09:41 ↗ is a community space

2:09:43 ↗ from here there's a plaza area at the

2:09:45 ↗ entrance to the Lincoln store I would

2:09:47 ↗ guess they would congregate in that area

2:09:49 ↗ for their bricks additional comments

2:09:56 ↗ concerns this one question would be so

2:10:01 ↗ the the CEPA canned conditions are not

2:10:04 ↗ in our purview to all other than as

2:10:06 ↗ recommendations or or whether we think

2:10:10 ↗ they've been appropriate enough in terms

2:10:14 ↗ for our decision we're making because

2:10:18 ↗ we're not approving the CEPA conditions

2:10:20 ↗ are we that's correct you're not

2:10:21 ↗ approving this

2:10:30 ↗ I guess from from my perspective in

2:10:32 ↗ reading your your condition B I think

2:10:37 ↗ I'd be happy if you added some language

2:10:38 ↗ and that you don't have to do tonight

2:10:42 ↗ but some language about acceptable

2:10:45 ↗ landscaping barriers well the augmenta

2:10:48 ↗ railfans

2:10:50 ↗ again the whole idea is just to try to

2:10:52 ↗ prevent people from going into that area

2:10:55 ↗ which i don't think it buddy wants that

2:10:56 ↗ to happen anyway so lucy are we allowed

2:11:02 ↗ to ask a question on how a certain

2:11:03 ↗ condition is being addressed in Seba

2:11:06 ↗ sure okay a question for the applicant

2:11:09 ↗ in the mdns the mitigated determination

2:11:14 ↗ of non significance condition three B

2:11:21 ↗ the stream and buffer shall be

2:11:23 ↗ encumbered by a public open space

2:11:25 ↗ conservation easement granted to the

2:11:27 ↗ city of Issaquah or other open space

2:11:29 ↗ protection mechanism can you clarify how

2:11:34 ↗ or where on the site plan that is being

2:11:38 ↗ addressed

2:11:40 ↗ I guess whether it's a public open space

2:11:42 ↗ or easement of some sorts so ng PE

2:11:48 ↗ native growth protection easement is

2:11:50 ↗ required over critical areas so it would

2:11:54 ↗ be the north fork north wall and its

2:11:57 ↗ buffers okay so it's just referring to

2:11:59 ↗ the 75 foot buffer that the applicant is

2:12:02 ↗ going okay thank you thanks for the

2:12:04 ↗ clarification

2:12:08 ↗ question for the applicants a landscape

2:12:11 ↗ expert in your opinion does the planting

2:12:18 ↗ area around the tributary is that

2:12:21 ↗ equivalent to the mitigation potential

2:12:25 ↗ of the plantings that we have by the

2:12:27 ↗ North Fork of Issaquah Creek are they

2:12:29 ↗ equally effective in terms of sediment

2:12:31 ↗ and nitrogen and phosphorus removal or

2:12:34 ↗ not the plantings that are currently in

2:12:36 ↗ there planted by wash time well again

2:12:42 ↗ there's there's no

2:12:44 ↗ runoff from our site that is that is

2:12:47 ↗ entering the buffer that has not treated

2:12:49 ↗ it's all treated with the flow spreader

2:12:51 ↗ and so and I should also point out that

2:12:56 ↗ the planting that washed out has

2:12:58 ↗ installed and then on both the North

2:13:00 ↗ Fork and the tributary that's in place

2:13:02 ↗ now it's growing like crazy

2:13:05 ↗ it's you know for being neglected and on

2:13:10 ↗ its own for two summers now with no

2:13:12 ↗ irrigation it's it's doing quite well

2:13:14 ↗ it's thriving actually I mean there

2:13:17 ↗ there's a few dead trees here and there

2:13:19 ↗ which is to be expected and something

2:13:21 ↗ that's just been left to its own devices

2:13:24 ↗ but it's doing quite well and on the

2:13:26 ↗ North Fork of the Issaquah Creek we're

2:13:28 ↗ going to be adding to that along the

2:13:31 ↗ ditch the vegetation that is in place

2:13:35 ↗ that washed out planted again is

2:13:37 ↗ thriving north of that the reason this

2:13:42 ↗ is my opinion the reason washed out

2:13:44 ↗ didn't continue up the ditch is there's

2:13:47 ↗ never any water in there and they they

2:13:49 ↗ have just left it alone and that's what

2:13:50 ↗ we're proposing to do as well because

2:13:51 ↗ it's off our property okay so in your

2:13:54 ↗ opinion is the washed out planning on

2:13:56 ↗ the tributary ditch sufficient for

2:14:00 ↗ preserving the habitat in that water

2:14:03 ↗ course yes I think it is

2:14:12 ↗ question for the applicant there was a

2:14:13 ↗ reference earlier about wheel stops are

2:14:16 ↗ those currently planned for the park

2:14:18 ↗ installs along the ditch side and if so

2:14:22 ↗ can you confirm there's adequate room to

2:14:25 ↗ park through two cars in line without

2:14:28 ↗ handing over the drive aisle so that's a

2:14:32 ↗ SEPA condition that we added that there

2:14:34 ↗ needed to be wheel stops along that edge

2:14:37 ↗ to ensure that you know there was not

2:14:39 ↗ the engine drippy part hanging into the

2:14:43 ↗ landscape area and we generally allow

2:14:49 ↗ two feet so we want we want everything

2:14:53 ↗ contained over the paved surfaces and

2:14:57 ↗ that's our experience is that if with

2:15:00 ↗ wheel stops in the right place

2:15:02 ↗ you're still the the lengthy the car

2:15:05 ↗ fits in the stall okay thank you

2:15:13 ↗ other thoughts concerns questions

2:15:23 ↗ it's a bag it's just a comment it seems

2:15:25 ↗ to me that the questions that come

2:15:26 ↗ opposite encode is it a ditch or a

2:15:30 ↗ stream it seems like or code it's a

2:15:34 ↗ ditch regulation that we would have to

2:15:37 ↗ look at and treated by the we couldn't I

2:15:40 ↗ don't see how we would make a different

2:15:43 ↗ conclusion that no this is not a digits

2:15:46 ↗ a stream and it would all be different

2:15:48 ↗ in which case then the question is are

2:15:50 ↗ the sepia is it better or worse than it

2:15:53 ↗ is right now and it seems to me the

2:15:56 ↗ water quality could end up being better

2:15:58 ↗ in terms of how its flows out it doesn't

2:16:01 ↗ seem like it's gonna be any worse and

2:16:03 ↗ that ditch than it is that yeah in

2:16:07 ↗ general I think I agree I did want to

2:16:09 ↗ bring at one point in response to a

2:16:12 ↗ comment from the public regarding our

2:16:14 ↗ definition of stream vs. ditch in the

2:16:17 ↗ IMC staff mentioned that different

2:16:20 ↗ municipalities have different

2:16:22 ↗ definitions for stream and indeed I

2:16:25 ↗ think the IMC definition is not

2:16:27 ↗ consistent with County code definition

2:16:30 ↗ for stream in a pretty important way I

2:16:33 ↗ think this is from the King County

2:16:36 ↗ sensitive area ordinance their

2:16:38 ↗ definition of stream streams are defined

2:16:41 ↗ in the sense of area ordinance as those

2:16:42 ↗ areas of King County where surface

2:16:44 ↗ waters produce a defined Channel or bed

2:16:47 ↗ very similar to IMC definition a defined

2:16:50 ↗ channel or bed is an area that

2:16:52 ↗ demonstrates clear evidence of the

2:16:54 ↗ passage of water and includes but it's

2:16:56 ↗ not limited to bedrock channels gravel

2:16:59 ↗ bed sand and cell beds and defined

2:17:01 ↗ channels Wales very similar our

2:17:03 ↗ definition as well the channel or bed

2:17:06 ↗ need not contain water year-round this

2:17:08 ↗ definition is not meant to include

2:17:10 ↗ irrigation ditches canals storm or

2:17:14 ↗ surface water runoff devices or other

2:17:16 ↗ entirely artificial water courses unless

2:17:20 ↗ they are used by salmonids or use to

2:17:23 ↗ convey streams naturally occurring prior

2:17:26 ↗ to construction in such water course so

2:17:28 ↗ a lot of that definition is very similar

2:17:30 ↗ to IMC code definition except for the

2:17:33 ↗ phrase and

2:17:34 ↗ it contains salmonids so given that we

2:17:38 ↗ have a critical area here and that that

2:17:40 ↗ is from the sensitive area guidance of

2:17:44 ↗ King County is putting that out is

2:17:46 ↗ something that I think we need to have

2:17:49 ↗ in consideration as we're deliberating

2:17:52 ↗ in regard to this and also consider when

2:17:57 ↗ section title 18 is revised

2:18:15 ↗ or the thoughts

2:18:18 ↗ when will Title 18 be revised next year

2:18:24 ↗ as it might have language like that I

2:18:27 ↗ imagine there'll be a lot of discussion

2:18:29 ↗ around that topic

2:18:42 ↗ I'm fast any any emotions anything to

2:18:46 ↗ add

2:18:54 ↗ you can make a decision move the

2:19:00 ↗ Development Commission approved the site

2:19:02 ↗ development permit for the Evergreen

2:19:03 ↗ Ford Lincoln project file number SDP

2:19:05 ↗ 19-0 zero zero zero one the associate

2:19:09 ↗ administrative adjustment of standards

2:19:10 ↗ file number AAS 1900 zero zero five as

2:19:15 ↗ described and evaluated in the staff

2:19:17 ↗ report it May 1st 2019 with attachments

2:19:20 ↗ one through eight briefing response memo

2:19:23 ↗ dated August 14 2019 with attachments

2:19:27 ↗ one through six and project drawings and

2:19:29 ↗ reports received March 5th 2019 and all

2:19:32 ↗ subsequent submittals

2:19:33 ↗ up to July 21 2009 teen and subject to

2:19:37 ↗ the conditions therein and as amended

2:19:39 ↗ tonight including revised condition ten

2:19:43 ↗ consistent with the minimum tree density

2:19:45 ↗ standards in SIDS 10.10 the applicant

2:19:48 ↗ shall plant one hundred and ten trees

2:19:51 ↗ measuring a minimum of two inch caliper

2:19:53 ↗ on site or in an approved off-site

2:19:56 ↗ location or else make a payment into the

2:19:59 ↗ tree fund in lieu of providing

2:20:00 ↗ replacement trees do you need any other

2:20:05 ↗ mention of anything any other materials

2:20:07 ↗ from tonight or we have we don't have

2:20:12 ↗ any changes to that

2:20:14 ↗ STP conditions proposed so I hear a

2:20:20 ↗ motion second

2:20:25 ↗ is there discussion would you like me if

2:20:30 ↗ if I wanted to to make a motion to add a

2:20:33 ↗ condition to revise Seba or I don't

2:20:40 ↗ think that's in your purview but I think

2:20:43 ↗ that we've heard your requests loud and

2:20:46 ↗ clear and I think that we can work with

2:20:48 ↗ the applicant to explore what kind of

2:20:53 ↗ plants can native plants can go in there

2:20:56 ↗ to marry or to - you know I think that

2:21:02 ↗ mark Garf

2:21:03 ↗ I think described or or Mike foster one

2:21:09 ↗ of those two gentlemen mentioned the

2:21:11 ↗ size of the plants you know that are

2:21:14 ↗ planted in washed-out and that seemed to

2:21:16 ↗ be the kind of scale that you thought

2:21:18 ↗ was important and I think we would want

2:21:20 ↗ that continuity anyway and it sounds

2:21:23 ↗ like it would be effective in achieving

2:21:25 ↗ your goal yeah I agree

2:21:29 ↗ lying in the expert opinion regarding

2:21:32 ↗ the plantings around the tributary I'm

2:21:34 ↗ satisfied that that's adequate

2:21:36 ↗ mitigation there further discussion I I

2:21:44 ↗ second that opinion I think a really a

2:21:46 ↗ some of the planting types there along

2:21:49 ↗ that along those parking stalls in that

2:21:51 ↗ ditch is worth taking a look at I think

2:21:55 ↗ overall what we've been presented has

2:22:00 ↗ been some very thorough details and we

2:22:03 ↗ are taking an existing site and on what

2:22:06 ↗ I think is making it in a better

2:22:08 ↗ situation and so I I support the

2:22:12 ↗ decision to move forward so I will call

2:22:17 ↗ for a vote all those in favor of the

2:22:20 ↗ motion passing the motion say aye

2:22:22 ↗ aye opposed motion carries

2:22:27 ↗ mr. chair I moved the development

2:22:29 ↗ Commission direct the development

2:22:30 ↗ services department to prepare findings

2:22:32 ↗ of fact and conclusions were

2:22:34 ↗ approval by the Development Commission

2:22:36 ↗ Chairman affirming the development

2:22:38 ↗ Commission's decision to approve the

2:22:39 ↗ Evergreen Ford Lincoln project members

2:22:42 ↗ SDP 19-0 zero zero zero one and AAS 19-0

2:22:47 ↗ zero zero zero five subject to the

2:22:50 ↗ conditions listed in the staff report

2:22:51 ↗ dated May 1 2019 with attachments one

2:22:55 ↗ through eight briefing response memo

2:22:57 ↗ dated August 21st 2019 with attachments

2:23:01 ↗ one through six and project drawings and

2:23:03 ↗ reports received March fifth 2019 and

2:23:06 ↗ all subsequent submittals up to July 21

2:23:09 ↗ 2009 teen and subject to the conditions

2:23:12 ↗ their IND and as amended tonight second

2:23:18 ↗ motions been made and seconded is there

2:23:20 ↗ discussion all those in favor of the

2:23:24 ↗ motion please say signify by saying aye

2:23:27 ↗ aye opposed motion carries so I think

2:23:33 ↗ we've done our job I do want to make a

2:23:37 ↗ couple of comments one is that you know

2:23:39 ↗ earlier a gentleman made some comment

2:23:41 ↗ about being for and against and I think

2:23:44 ↗ it's really important when we get into

2:23:46 ↗ these public opportunities to realize

2:23:48 ↗ that difference of opinions don't

2:23:51 ↗ necessarily have to be for or against

2:23:54 ↗ they can be let's just make it better no

2:23:56 ↗ I don't think there's necessarily a

2:23:58 ↗ prohibition to development I just think

2:24:00 ↗ that we have a wonderful unique

2:24:03 ↗ opportunity in this democracy to be able

2:24:06 ↗ to participate in the decision-making

2:24:07 ↗ process and I think it's really critical

2:24:09 ↗ that we afford each other the luxury of

2:24:12 ↗ being able to articulate different

2:24:15 ↗ opinions and not necessarily feel like

2:24:17 ↗ it's for or against it's just it's as

2:24:19 ↗ healthy I want to thank all the people

2:24:21 ↗ that made comments both positive ones

2:24:23 ↗ that are for comments and against

2:24:25 ↗ comments because they just make us

2:24:26 ↗ better and that's what this commission

2:24:29 ↗ is about and what we're trying to do in

2:24:30 ↗ the city is being transparent so I thank

2:24:33 ↗ you all for your participation I'm sorry

2:24:34 ↗ we ran a little late we usually go til

2:24:38 ↗ 12:00 or 12:30 but I can see

2:24:40 ↗ I appreciate your participation and just

2:24:43 ↗ encourage you all to be safe going home

2:24:45 ↗ so with that I will adjourn the meeting

2:24:47 ↗ oh wait no I can't adjourn the meeting I

2:24:50 ↗ have to say there's other business we

2:24:52 ↗ our next meeting is currently scheduled

2:24:55 ↗ for October 16th and the council

2:24:57 ↗ chambers now we're adjourned thank you

2:25:08 ↗ you

2:25:13 ↗ you

Approved minutes

Extracted from the next meeting's packet, where this meeting's minutes were approved as a consent-calendar attachment.

Open PDF

Attendance

Council / Members (11)

Richard Sowa

Mel Morgan

Michael Brennan

Kevin Price

Richard Sanford

Brooke Shore

Arthur Schulte

Michael Brennan

Ben Rush

Mark Rigos

Nischitha Venkatesh

Staff (4)

Lucy Sloman, Land Development Mgr.

Katie Cote, Planning Consultant

Doug Schlepp, Engineering Consultant

Keith Niven, Dev. Srcs. & Econ. Dev. Dir.

Guests (4)

Mark Garff, SCJ Alliance

Tyrell Bradley, SCJ Alliance

Mike Foster, O’Neill Service Group

Greg Johnson, The Watershed Company

Recommendations & actions (6)

Sentences extracted from the narrative containing words like recommended, requested, directed, moved, or approved. Best-effort — verify against the full minutes for context.

a) It was the consensus of all Commissioners present that minutes of the Development Commission meeting on August 15, 2019 be approved as presented.
b) It was the consensus of all Commissioners present that minutes of the Development Commission meeting on August 21, 2019 be approved as presented.
c) It was the consensus of all Commissioners present that minutes of the Development Commission meeting on September 25, 2019 be approved as presented.
Vine maples are considered a shrub and not a tree, so an alternative native tree species must be selected and approved by the City’s consultant during landscape permit review.
Sloman replied the City has a performance bond for the plantings that are approved, and regular plantings have to be maintained for three years, then inspected to be sure they have established.
Commission Decision MOVED BY MORGAN, SECONDED BY PRICE that the Development Commission approve the Site Development Permit for the Evergreen Lincoln Ford Project, File No.