← Back to City Council Digest

Development Commission Auto captions

Wednesday, October 6, 2021

7:00 PM · 2h 2m
Watch on YouTube ↗ Agenda PDF ↗ Minutes PDF Transcript .txt
Section
1. CALL TO ORDER
1a
Commission Membership
packet pp.3
▶ Watch from 0:04 Open packet at p.3 ↗
Staff report:
DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION Staff Liaison Lucy Sloman, Land About Development Manager Created in 1983, this commission reviews all Email Lucy Sloman land use actions requiring a Level 3 review. The Commission further serves as an advisory Regular Members board to the City Council on land use actions 2022 – Michael Brennan requiring council approval (Level 5 review). 2022 – Richard Sanford 2022 – Richard Sowa The appearance of fairness doctrine prohibits 2023 – Patty Dillon Development Commission members and City 2023 – Brooke Shore Council members from discussing the merit of 2024 – Kevin Price specific land use development applications 2024 – Arthur Schulte outside of the formal public meeting process. Citizens, however, may discuss any issue with Alternate Members the City's Development Services
2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
2a
Minutes of June 16, 2021
packet pp.5–8
Open packet at p.5 ↗
Staff report:
APPROVAL OF MINUTES a) 06-16-21 Development Commission Minutes Page [0000] CITY OF ISSAQUAH Development Commission 7:00 PM Virtual Meeting June 16, 2021 MINUTES
2b
Minutes of September 29, 2021
packet pp.9
Open packet at p.9 ↗
Staff report:
APPROVAL OF MINUTES b) 09-29-21 Development Commission Minutes Page [0000]
3. AGENDA ITEMS
3a
Title 18 Introduction
Information · Minnie Dhaliwal, Community Planning & Development Director Lucy Sloman, Land Development Manager · packet pp.11–40
Topics: Land Use
Open packet at p.11 ↗
Staff report:
Staff will provide background on updating Issaquah’s land use regulations, with a focus on the Goals and Outcomes Document that provides high level guidance for the updates.
5. REPORTS
5a
Council Update
Lucy Sloman, Land Development Manager
6. OTHER BUSINESS / ANNOUNCEMENTS
6a
Upcoming Schedule
packet pp.41
▶ Watch from 1:06:38 Open packet at p.41 ↗
Staff report:
OTHER BUSINESS / ANNOUNCEMENTS a) 2021 Development Commission Schedule (tentative) (updated 9/17/2021)
1789 segments .txt ↗
0:00 ↗ good evening uh welcome to the
0:02 ↗ october 6th development commission
0:04 ↗ meeting we'll call the meeting to order
0:06 ↗ um we have a few business items or a
0:08 ↗ couple business items to take care of a
0:11 ↗ couple of meeting minutes from past
0:13 ↗ meetings the main topic this evening is
0:16 ↗ reviewing the title 18
0:18 ↗ code change process and staff will be
0:20 ↗ providing us a presentation on that to
0:22 ↗ see if you also have an opportunity
0:23 ↗ after the staff presentation
0:25 ↗ uh for public comment if there are
0:27 ↗ members of the public on the
0:29 ↗ in the meeting i would like to
0:31 ↗ comment to the commission
0:33 ↗ so first orders of business amendment or
0:36 ↗ excuse me approval of the meeting
0:37 ↗ minutes so the first meeting minutes
0:39 ↗ were from may i take attendance first
0:42 ↗ just so we have that in the record first
0:44 ↗ thank you
0:46 ↗ commissioner brennan
0:48 ↗ here
0:50 ↗ commissioner sanford
0:52 ↗ commissioner soha
1:03 ↗ present i the reason i keep going on
1:05 ↗ mute is i have cuckoo clocks and they
1:07 ↗ annoy people to death so i keep turning
1:09 ↗ it off so it doesn't bother people
1:11 ↗ i'm here
1:12 ↗ uh commissioner dylan
1:16 ↗ here
1:17 ↗ commissioner shaw
1:20 ↗ here
1:22 ↗ commissioner price
1:23 ↗ president
1:25 ↗ commissioner schulte
1:27 ↗ here
1:28 ↗ mr ikeda
1:31 ↗ here
1:32 ↗ and commissioner morgan
1:34 ↗ here
1:36 ↗ thank you
1:37 ↗ great thank you so um the draft meeting
1:41 ↗ minutes from june 16th
1:43 ↗ um are there any
1:45 ↗ uh corrections um or um
1:50 ↗ issues that people uh disagree with the
1:52 ↗ way they've been stated in their meeting
1:53 ↗ minutes
1:56 ↗ there is one
1:58 ↗ uh i have one i think it notes that the
2:00 ↗ meeting was
2:02 ↗ called the order at 7 30 and i believe
2:04 ↗ we called that meeting to order at seven
2:06 ↗ per the agenda so when we make that
2:08 ↗ quick correction
2:10 ↗ are there any other corrections to those
2:12 ↗ meeting minutes
2:14 ↗ hearing none we'll adopt those meeting
2:16 ↗ minutes by consensus
2:18 ↗ i'm moving on to the meeting minutes for
2:22 ↗ the june or excuse me the september 29th
2:25 ↗ meeting
2:26 ↗ any corrections
2:28 ↗ uh to those meeting minutes
2:33 ↗ hearing none those minutes are also
2:35 ↗ adopted by consensus
2:37 ↗ so moving on to the main topic this
2:39 ↗ evening um i'll hand it over to staff on
2:42 ↗ the presentation for the title 18 land
2:44 ↗ use code amendment
2:49 ↗ so is it i'm not sure who takes the
2:51 ↗ point
2:52 ↗ i i can take it from here um chair
2:54 ↗ brandon um thank you everyone um it was
2:57 ↗ good to see some of you at the tour
2:59 ↗ so what we want to do today is just to
3:02 ↗ give you a little background on
3:04 ↗ this land use code update
3:06 ↗ uh and and try and get you up to speed
3:09 ↗ on where what we've been doing
3:11 ↗ what planning and policy commission has
3:13 ↗ been uh you know work working on for now
3:16 ↗ and where you'll be stepping in
3:19 ↗ so primarily planning and policy
3:21 ↗ commission has been added for a few
3:23 ↗ months now
3:24 ↗ but we wanted to have a chance with you
3:26 ↗ to give you a little bit of framework of
3:30 ↗ what this project is what your role is
3:32 ↗ going to be
3:34 ↗ and what lies ahead in the in the coming
3:36 ↗ months um primarily because you do the
3:39 ↗ hard work you know you're always doing
3:41 ↗ the quasi-judicial matters which are
3:43 ↗ much more legal and you know um i have a
3:45 ↗ different framework this is more on the
3:47 ↗ policy discussion
3:49 ↗ um and planning and policy
3:51 ↗ commission is the city's commission it
3:53 ↗ has to make a recommendation to council
3:56 ↗ but the way we've structured um this
3:58 ↗ code update is to engage with additional
4:00 ↗ boards and commissions because you bring
4:02 ↗ a different perspective a different
4:04 ↗ you've seen these development projects
4:06 ↗ come in front of you you've
4:08 ↗ vetted out some of the things does it
4:09 ↗ meet the code does it not meet the code
4:11 ↗ so you bring a unique perspective
4:13 ↗ that's really important for the code
4:15 ↗ to be at a place where it can be
4:17 ↗ implemented well
4:18 ↗ it's well grounded and
4:21 ↗ meets the intent of one how how you're
4:24 ↗ going to be looking at the staff reports
4:26 ↗ for the future so with that um
4:30 ↗ i wanted to i can start sharing my
4:33 ↗ screen here we have a little
4:34 ↗ presentation um i think we included a
4:37 ↗ copy of that in your packet
4:41 ↗ so let's see hopefully this will work
4:55 ↗ can you all see my screen
4:57 ↗ great yes
4:59 ↗ um so title 18 is just one title of the
5:03 ↗ whole sequel municipal code
5:06 ↗ um your you know this group probably all
5:09 ↗ knows what the land use code is but it's
5:10 ↗ basically includes all the development
5:13 ↗ regulations
5:14 ↗ at the end of the day it's
5:16 ↗ the regulations that tell us how the
5:19 ↗ land is divided how it's used how it's
5:21 ↗ developed
5:23 ↗ the different chapters in this title
5:26 ↗ zoning
5:27 ↗ subdivisions
5:29 ↗ critical areas
5:31 ↗ landscaping
5:33 ↗ design guidelines
5:35 ↗ and then a whole assortment of
5:37 ↗ development standards that regulate the
5:39 ↗ bulk and scale of what uh is permitted
5:41 ↗ under the code from height glory ratios
5:44 ↗ parking
5:45 ↗ and then it also includes how
5:48 ↗ we process these land use applications
5:50 ↗ so there's a whole procedural
5:52 ↗ aspect of it how do we notify uh the
5:55 ↗ public who makes the decision who does
5:57 ↗ it get appealed to all of those
5:59 ↗ regulations live in this
6:01 ↗ title
6:04 ↗ and a little bit of history on this uh
6:07 ↗ title 18 and what the city uh aspires as
6:10 ↗ part of this code update
6:12 ↗ uh it was originally adopted in 1996 and
6:15 ↗ then it's become this patchwork of
6:17 ↗ ordinances one
6:19 ↗ because the city
6:20 ↗ you know a lot of the development in the
6:22 ↗ city was done under the development
6:23 ↗ agreement so isaqua highlands uh the
6:25 ↗ talus neighborhood
6:28 ↗ were developed under the development
6:30 ↗ agreement as those development
6:31 ↗ agreements sunset they were folded into
6:34 ↗ a replacement regulations so if you have
6:36 ↗ to figure out uh what you want to do on
6:39 ↗ your property sometimes in our code now
6:41 ↗ you have to go to five different places
6:43 ↗ central essequal plan is a whole
6:45 ↗ separate thing than than title 18. so
6:49 ↗ part of the goal is to consolidate all
6:51 ↗ these um
6:53 ↗ different pieces that live in different
6:55 ↗ documents into one comprehensive code
6:58 ↗ that's more streamlined that is not
7:00 ↗ duplicative and where different sections
7:03 ↗ of the code don't conflict with each
7:05 ↗ other
7:06 ↗ but beyond that there is also
7:09 ↗ some of the goals and outcomes that
7:11 ↗ we'll just get into
7:13 ↗ and
7:14 ↗ the title 18 ad hoc committee which is
7:17 ↗ made up of uh three council members uh
7:19 ↗ was tasked to identify the stakeholders
7:22 ↗ you know recommend a project scope come
7:25 ↗ up with a public engagement plan
7:27 ↗ and uh make some recommendations so uh
7:30 ↗ we are working with them um they they
7:32 ↗ were instrumental in creating this
7:34 ↗ golden outcomes chart last year uh since
7:37 ↗ then uh council has awarded uh our um
7:41 ↗ professional services contract
7:44 ↗ it's an assortment of consultant teams
7:46 ↗ some with a specialty you know there's a
7:48 ↗ critical area we're going to the people
7:50 ↗ that know about wetlands and streams
7:53 ↗ if it is a steep slope
7:55 ↗ issue then we have engaged geotechnical
7:58 ↗ engineers in the team
8:00 ↗ and so on and so forth but there's a
8:02 ↗ wide variety of uh sub-consultants but
8:05 ↗ the lead is the bhc
8:08 ↗ so a little bit of
8:10 ↗ you know what what's the filter the
8:12 ↗ framework
8:13 ↗ um that's in place for this land use
8:16 ↗ code update as you probably all know
8:19 ↗ growth management act in this region
8:21 ↗ sets the framework um and then peterson
8:24 ↗ regional council comes up with the
8:26 ↗ vision 2050 they do the forecasting for
8:28 ↗ the region they come up with
8:30 ↗ what's coming our way in terms of the
8:32 ↗ growth uh both in in housing and in
8:35 ↗ popular population as well as jobs
8:38 ↗ and and sets the framework where that
8:40 ↗ growth is going to go
8:42 ↗ um the county-wide planning policies
8:44 ↗ have to be consistent with all of those
8:46 ↗ things
8:48 ↗ then essequa's comprehensive plan
8:50 ↗ is then has to be consistent with all
8:53 ↗ those underlying layers but then it
8:55 ↗ brings the unique perspective for the
8:57 ↗ community here what do they desire as
8:59 ↗ long as it's consistent with all those
9:01 ↗ things
9:02 ↗ the community chooses where the 20 years
9:05 ↗ from now
9:06 ↗ will look like where where should the
9:08 ↗ growth within issaquah go
9:10 ↗ so the comprehensive plan sets has
9:13 ↗ multiple um
9:14 ↗ elements and
9:16 ↗ uh we'll get into that here in a little
9:19 ↗ bit um
9:21 ↗ so growth management planning you know
9:24 ↗ smart growth sustainable development
9:26 ↗ those are the goals for for the region
9:31 ↗ you you know you're reducing sprawl
9:33 ↗ you're having multi-modal transportation
9:36 ↗ you have a variety of housing types uh
9:39 ↗ you're encouraging economic development
9:41 ↗ while protecting property rights
9:43 ↗ you're issuing permits in a timely
9:45 ↗ manner you're you know being fair uh and
9:48 ↗ not uh
9:50 ↗ you know arbitrary in your decisions
9:52 ↗ um you're preserving open space uh
9:55 ↗ you're protecting the environment you're
9:57 ↗ engaging the citizens
10:00 ↗ and ensuring that adequate public
10:02 ↗ facilities and services are provided and
10:05 ↗ to everyone
10:06 ↗ if there are historic uh properties and
10:09 ↗ values and sites that you're taking care
10:12 ↗ of those
10:13 ↗ and then of course the shoreline
10:15 ↗ management that's the lake the two
10:17 ↗ streams in case of issaquah that the
10:19 ↗ shoreline management act also applies
10:22 ↗ so um
10:24 ↗ that's at the you know everyone in the
10:26 ↗ region has to meet these goals
10:30 ↗ in addition we have um some state laws
10:33 ↗ state environmental policy act
10:36 ↗ which uh looks at things that fall
10:38 ↗ through you know
10:40 ↗ this was something that was established
10:41 ↗ in the 1970s um back in the day uh
10:46 ↗ cities and and jurisdictions did not
10:48 ↗ have a lot of uh regulations in place
10:50 ↗ since then a lot of cities have critical
10:53 ↗ area ordinances they have shoreline
10:55 ↗ regulations and such
10:56 ↗ but there still are pieces that
10:59 ↗ can't be in the gray area or aren't in
11:02 ↗ the code so sipa is a tool to look at
11:05 ↗ where are things that are not um
11:08 ↗ a potential to fall through the crack so
11:10 ↗ it looks at it more comprehensively
11:12 ↗ what's the impact to the environment
11:14 ↗ that's not addressed by your code then
11:16 ↗ you can use the cpa as a tool for
11:18 ↗ getting those uh
11:20 ↗ impacts mitigated
11:23 ↗ shoreline like i said there are three
11:26 ↗ bodies of water uh that department of
11:28 ↗ ecology has an oversight over our
11:30 ↗ shoreline regulations the city went
11:32 ↗ through a shoreline master program
11:35 ↗ update recently we are looking at a
11:38 ↗ couple things in the shoreline
11:40 ↗ regulations the council asked us to but
11:42 ↗ for the most part that work was
11:44 ↗ undertaken last year
11:47 ↗ subdivisions uh again these are matters
11:51 ↗ of the state how the land is divided and
11:53 ↗ it has the most lasting impact in terms
11:55 ↗ of what happens
11:57 ↗ for development for decades if not
11:59 ↗ centuries to come
12:01 ↗ the size of the lots the yeah the
12:03 ↗ infrastructure that's put in the
12:05 ↗ utilities and and all that that goes
12:07 ↗ with it
12:09 ↗ critical areas again there is guidance
12:11 ↗ at the department of ecology level for
12:13 ↗ wetlands for fish and wildlife for the
12:15 ↗ streams so these have to be consistent
12:18 ↗ with the best available signs
12:22 ↗ so now in terms of uh city of issaquah
12:26 ↗ we have some of these uh plans
12:28 ↗ long-range plans a strategic plan
12:31 ↗ uh which uh some of you may have worked
12:33 ↗ or participated in that update recently
12:37 ↗ plan an old town sub-area plan this is
12:40 ↗ the city's uh 20-year
12:42 ↗ vision um central issaquah plan um the
12:46 ↗ city did some work uh in
12:49 ↗ 2012 i believe that looked at the
12:50 ↗ central issaquah
12:52 ↗ and most of the growth is projected to
12:54 ↗ occur in central asia
12:56 ↗ for the next 20 years
12:59 ↗ our parks department
13:01 ↗ took the lead on the park strategic plan
13:04 ↗ and there are pieces in there uh that we
13:06 ↗ want to make sure
13:08 ↗ get incorporated into title 18 um
13:12 ↗ primarily the green necklace how
13:14 ↗ different areas are connected by trails
13:16 ↗ and and other connections
13:18 ↗ and how development uh kind of works
13:21 ↗ around those connections
13:23 ↗ um master mobility plan was the effort
13:26 ↗ that the city did uh
13:28 ↗ you know um i believe last year or or
13:31 ↗ it's a more recent work that went into
13:33 ↗ that with a lot of public engagement
13:36 ↗ that looked at all these other uh plans
13:38 ↗ and and looked at
13:40 ↗ transportation so now we're looking at
13:43 ↗ you know the land use and the
13:44 ↗ transportation work well together or not
13:47 ↗ and how to make them work together by
13:49 ↗ this title 18 code update
13:52 ↗ um the city's also uh almo you know has
13:55 ↗ done a lot of work on the climate action
13:57 ↗ plan um it's right now scheduled to be
14:00 ↗ adopted by city council uh towards the
14:03 ↗ end of this year
14:05 ↗ so those are some long-range plans so
14:07 ↗ any
14:08 ↗ code title 18 that we we are
14:12 ↗ going to present for discussion has to
14:14 ↗ be consistent with all of these plans
14:17 ↗ so we cannot now go off on a different
14:20 ↗ path which is inconsistent with some of
14:22 ↗ these adopted uh
14:24 ↗ long-range plans
14:26 ↗ so now moving on to what title 18 ad hoc
14:30 ↗ committee um
14:32 ↗ and council did um
14:34 ↗ expect as uh some goals and outcomes
14:37 ↗ from this title 18 update
14:39 ↗ um you know protecting forested hillside
14:42 ↗ is an
14:43 ↗ as a goal
14:44 ↗ and it's in our land use policies and
14:47 ↗ strategic plans so it is it comes from
14:49 ↗ those
14:50 ↗ long range plans but it's an explicit
14:52 ↗ goal of this title 18 update
14:55 ↗ providing adequate parking while using
14:58 ↗ land efficiently
15:01 ↗ is another one and that comes from the
15:03 ↗ master mobility uh
15:05 ↗ outreach from the centralist equipment
15:07 ↗ and and so on
15:09 ↗ conserving and protecting
15:11 ↗ environmentally critical areas
15:13 ↗ enhancing wetlands and riparian
15:15 ↗ corridors
15:17 ↗ improving public awareness of
15:18 ↗ development and construction activities
15:21 ↗ um so
15:22 ↗ people don't just find out when they see
15:24 ↗ you know construction being occurring
15:26 ↗ next to them that there is
15:28 ↗ a very clear path of engaging with the
15:31 ↗ public early on in the process
15:33 ↗ um increasing housing diversity
15:36 ↗ uh ensuring the tree as canopies
15:39 ↗ retained
15:41 ↗ and then
15:43 ↗ these ones are where you're going to
15:45 ↗ come in um because some of those other
15:46 ↗ ones we've been working on some other
15:49 ↗ topics that i'll get into a little bit
15:52 ↗ retaining the charm and distinctive
15:54 ↗ character for asafoet this is very
15:56 ↗ important to the community um it comes
15:58 ↗ from the strategic plan um
16:01 ↗ and this is where the code has to be you
16:05 ↗ know meet these some of these uh more
16:06 ↗ broader objectives
16:09 ↗ creating a livable community
16:12 ↗ uh having sustainable development and
16:14 ↗ climate goals
16:15 ↗ how are we managing uh travel and and
16:18 ↗ parking
16:19 ↗ um successfully implementing the park
16:22 ↗ strategic plan
16:23 ↗ and then um sign code work is already uh
16:26 ↗ concluded uh but that was also one of
16:28 ↗ the goals to
16:30 ↗ make that uh consistent with some of the
16:32 ↗ legal requirements
16:34 ↗ and then modernizing our code and
16:36 ↗ incorporating best practices
16:38 ↗ is of course uh an overarching umbrella
16:41 ↗ goal
16:45 ↗ real briefly a strategic plan has these
16:48 ↗ uh six things that are listed on the
16:50 ↗ left uh mobility growth and development
16:52 ↗ environmental stewardship
16:54 ↗ social economic vitality all of these
16:57 ↗ things
16:57 ↗ um are listed in the strategic plan this
16:59 ↗ is more um you know for
17:03 ↗ background information about what's a
17:04 ↗ strategic plan
17:06 ↗ um so that the time frame one strategic
17:08 ↗ plan usually is like a five-year plan a
17:11 ↗ comprehensive plan is usually a 20-year
17:14 ↗ plan that gets into
17:16 ↗ the state law requires some required
17:18 ↗ elements um this is where i think some
17:21 ↗ of the confusion has occurred with some
17:23 ↗ of the other boards and commissions but
17:24 ↗ maybe not so with this uh commission
17:27 ↗ because you're very familiar with uh
17:29 ↗ development
17:30 ↗ a goal you know the difference between a
17:32 ↗ goal a policy and code
17:35 ↗ so gold's going to be at a much higher
17:37 ↗ level um
17:38 ↗ and then a policy is going to be for
17:40 ↗ instance for trees if an example you
17:42 ↗ know retaining a canopy coverage could
17:45 ↗ be a goal
17:46 ↗ the policy would be update your codes so
17:50 ↗ so you retain the trees and you have
17:52 ↗ some replacement requirements and then
17:55 ↗ the code will get into the nitty gritty
17:58 ↗ of if you cut down a tree that's um 18
18:01 ↗ inches in diameter you need to replace
18:04 ↗ four trees so just keeping that in mind
18:07 ↗ because i think as the discussion over
18:09 ↗ what we've learned
18:11 ↗ um through our engagement with the
18:13 ↗ commission so far is i think they become
18:15 ↗ you know if you keep that clear about
18:17 ↗ golden policies and then this effort is
18:20 ↗ really the the code update
18:24 ↗ so this is another example um
18:26 ↗ of what's a goal
18:28 ↗ and what's a policy
18:30 ↗ um so for instance um maintaining and
18:33 ↗ enhancing the natural systems you know
18:35 ↗ an aspiration for the at the goal level
18:38 ↗ the policies encouraging efficient use
18:41 ↗ of land by allowing clustering of
18:43 ↗ buildings and then the code is going to
18:46 ↗ what does clustering mean it means you
18:48 ↗ can have to protect 20 of your land area
18:52 ↗ and you cannot exceed this much density
18:54 ↗ or whatever those uh parameters might be
18:59 ↗ so a little bit of background on central
19:02 ↗ issaquah i don't know if you've had any
19:04 ↗ project come to you
19:05 ↗ that was built in central isoqua maybe
19:08 ↗ not maybe you have reviewed it but it's
19:11 ↗ it's a whole another document we call it
19:13 ↗ central issaquah design development
19:15 ↗ standard so it's outside of the the
19:17 ↗ title 18 right now it's referenced
19:20 ↗ um but
19:21 ↗ a lot of work went into with the
19:23 ↗ community
19:24 ↗ to create a vision for
19:26 ↗ for this area you know creating a
19:28 ↗ livable sustainable compact connected
19:31 ↗ urban community
19:32 ↗ where pedestrians are a priority
19:35 ↗ um and so on so that's the vision for
19:37 ↗ this area
19:39 ↗ but title 18 is going to get into the
19:42 ↗ nuances of the code it's going to be a
19:44 ↗ zoning ordinance it's a design review
19:47 ↗ process
19:49 ↗ and and such
19:51 ↗ and
19:52 ↗ so now stepping back in terms of
19:55 ↗ the different
19:56 ↗ groupings in title 18 that we are
19:59 ↗ updating so for the purposes of this
20:01 ↗ update we have broken them into
20:05 ↗ these six broader groups so natural
20:08 ↗ environment is one
20:10 ↗ landscaping in open space
20:13 ↗ and green necklace is the second group
20:17 ↗ so we have worked with the planning and
20:19 ↗ policy commission and the environmental
20:21 ↗ board on those two topics so we have
20:24 ↗ done the gaps analysis and
20:26 ↗ and policy guidance discussion um on
20:29 ↗ those two topics with those two boards
20:32 ↗ where you come in are these three um
20:35 ↗ that are outlined in blue here
20:37 ↗ so these we have uh planned to have a
20:40 ↗ conversation with both planning and
20:42 ↗ policy commission and development
20:43 ↗ commission together as a joint meeting
20:46 ↗ so the first one is zoning and uses um
20:49 ↗ what's the zoning what are the different
20:51 ↗ uses allowed in different parts of the
20:53 ↗ city um this will be where we'll be
20:55 ↗ launching into uh the first meeting that
20:57 ↗ you have jointly with
20:59 ↗ ppc
21:01 ↗ building and design
21:03 ↗ you know site planning
21:05 ↗ building design
21:07 ↗ townhouse design miscellaneous uh how
21:10 ↗ the four different parts of the city old
21:12 ↗ town central issaquah highlands and
21:14 ↗ telus what those overlays and
21:16 ↗ distinguishing
21:17 ↗ um codes need to be what can be common
21:20 ↗ for the all the entire city what for
21:23 ↗ those four areas makes them unique that
21:25 ↗ needs to be addressed separately
21:27 ↗ um and then of course um
21:30 ↗ um you know the zoning and development
21:32 ↗ standards there's some in here that
21:34 ↗ you know planning and policy commission
21:36 ↗ is going to be the primary um
21:38 ↗ conversation we're going to have with
21:40 ↗ but parking in circulation is where uh
21:42 ↗ we want to engage with you
21:45 ↗ and planning and policy commission
21:46 ↗ together
21:48 ↗ and lastly is the procedures and
21:50 ↗ administration
21:51 ↗ you know how we process things and and
21:54 ↗ all the miscellaneous other other
21:56 ↗ items that we didn't cover in the other
21:59 ↗ larger six groups
22:02 ↗ so another example so for instance for
22:04 ↗ parking
22:05 ↗ a vision to provide safe you know
22:08 ↗ adequate storage for cars
22:11 ↗ and then the code means your parking
22:13 ↗ stall need you know for this use you
22:16 ↗ need this many parking stalls they need
22:19 ↗ to be screened from the parking space by
22:21 ↗ having a
22:22 ↗ you know some landscaping screening
22:25 ↗ or having a connected path pedestrian
22:28 ↗ path that connects how wide that needs
22:30 ↗ to be what materials need to be used so
22:32 ↗ all those nuances for the parking would
22:36 ↗ what gets addressed with the title 18
22:38 ↗ update
22:40 ↗ same thing with circulation you know at
22:42 ↗ a policy level having multi-modal
22:45 ↗ connections where people can bike and
22:47 ↗ walk and and get without um
22:51 ↗ and what does that mean in terms of the
22:53 ↗ code when do you need to provide this
22:55 ↗ grid when you're doing a development do
22:57 ↗ you build a half street the other
22:59 ↗ property owner built the half street
23:01 ↗ when is the these cross connections
23:03 ↗ connected connections required so all of
23:07 ↗ that is going to be in the title 18
23:09 ↗ update
23:10 ↗ um you're very familiar with this you
23:12 ↗ know when you know i'm not going to
23:14 ↗ spend too much time because you you've
23:15 ↗ looked at a lot of site plans and and
23:17 ↗ what comes in front of you
23:20 ↗ and then of course what the flow of the
23:22 ↗ process looks like
23:25 ↗ you know when there's a
23:27 ↗ community collaboration meeting i still
23:29 ↗ get confused between
23:30 ↗ collaboration community meeting and the
23:33 ↗ neighborhood meeting and we have like
23:34 ↗ five different types of these things and
23:36 ↗ i'm still on the learning curve of what
23:38 ↗ these are
23:39 ↗ uh but this sort of captures what our
23:42 ↗ flow of our land use decision is so
23:45 ↗ we'll be looking at this uh what makes
23:47 ↗ sense i think for your um uh role as a
23:51 ↗ quasi-judicial board you're very well
23:53 ↗ familiar with the legal
23:55 ↗ issues that come up um when you process
23:58 ↗ the quasi-judicial
24:00 ↗ matter
24:01 ↗ so that's really you know 101 on
24:05 ↗ on the code
24:07 ↗ in terms of the status and the timeline
24:10 ↗ for this update
24:12 ↗ we engaged
24:14 ↗ with the priming and policy commission
24:15 ↗ earlier this year kind of mid-year
24:18 ↗ in june that's when we started
24:20 ↗ and like i said we've captured the first
24:23 ↗ two topics um and
24:26 ↗ and our hope is that we uh
24:28 ↗ we've broken up the whole thing into
24:30 ↗ three different phases so
24:32 ↗ the first phase we're undertaking is
24:34 ↗ gaps analysis and policy guidance
24:37 ↗ so that's at a higher level
24:39 ↗ really trying to understand the scope of
24:41 ↗ the changes that need to be made what
24:43 ↗ are the problems with that section
24:46 ↗ and we
24:48 ↗ will be preparing a code update memo
24:50 ↗ that looks at some of these gaps you
24:52 ↗ know where are we missing the mark on
24:54 ↗ the vision and the comprehensive plan
24:56 ↗ where
24:57 ↗ are we missing the mark as far as the
24:59 ↗ state law requirements are so we the
25:01 ↗ staff and consultant team prepares all
25:04 ↗ that and then we look at you know is
25:06 ↗ there some policy guidance questions we
25:08 ↗ need from the boards and commission so
25:10 ↗ we identify that but we also take any
25:13 ↗ input from your perspective that should
25:15 ↗ be factored in before we are actually
25:17 ↗ going to write the the first draft of
25:19 ↗ the code
25:20 ↗ so the gaps analysis policy guidance is
25:23 ↗ phase one that's where we're at
25:25 ↗ and then after finishing that we will
25:27 ↗ start writing the actual code language
25:29 ↗ and and we intend to release the code at
25:32 ↗ least for each of these larger groupings
25:36 ↗ at least a month prior to
25:38 ↗ the public hearing so people have the
25:40 ↗ time the community members and the
25:41 ↗ boards and commissions have the time to
25:43 ↗ look at it ask questions of staff
25:46 ↗ uh we're happy to engage you know this
25:48 ↗ is not a quasi-judicial matter so if you
25:50 ↗ have questions feel free to reach out to
25:52 ↗ staff directly to me lucy anyone
25:56 ↗ and we want to make sure we're giving
25:57 ↗ you the tools to really understand what
25:59 ↗ this undertaking is because it's
26:00 ↗ different than we are traditional role
26:02 ↗ of looking at development projects so
26:05 ↗ this is a policy
26:06 ↗ recommendation to cancel on some of
26:08 ↗ these code updates
26:11 ↗ so after the public hearings then the
26:14 ↗ the planning and policy commission will
26:16 ↗ deliberate and make a formal
26:17 ↗ recommendation to city council who will
26:20 ↗ then make the final decision and our
26:23 ↗ goal is to get all of this adopted by
26:25 ↗ the end of next year
26:27 ↗ so with that i want to make sure um
26:31 ↗ we have time to answer your questions or
26:34 ↗ you know
26:35 ↗ if you have any feedback on what will be
26:37 ↗ useful for you as you undertake uh this
26:39 ↗ is gonna be a heavy lift um you know
26:41 ↗ it's it's a lot of reading and and
26:44 ↗ whatnot but we want to make sure
26:46 ↗ we're there to assist you and make break
26:49 ↗ it down into a
26:50 ↗ understandable piece
26:53 ↗ great thank you well are there questions
26:55 ↗ commissioners do you have questions
26:58 ↗ um or any comments about the information
27:00 ↗ that was just presented
27:03 ↗ about the process the content
27:07 ↗ yeah a couple of questions richard
27:09 ↗ sanford
27:10 ↗ um is the target date did i read for
27:12 ↗ this entire project like the end of
27:16 ↗ 2021 or 22
27:18 ↗ 22 end of 2022 okay so i guess we would
27:23 ↗ be involved in a series of meetings with
27:25 ↗ ppc then over that time period and we'll
27:28 ↗ see what that schedule is at some point
27:32 ↗ yes i think lucy sent you all um a
27:35 ↗ schedule to uh before this meeting today
27:41 ↗ yeah
27:42 ↗ yeah we received this uh email from lucy
27:45 ↗ that listed the upcoming uh commission
27:48 ↗ meetings a lot of it is related to
27:51 ↗ the title 18 work
27:54 ↗ right and i assume we probably expect
27:57 ↗ quite a few more meetings than is in
27:59 ↗ that schedule right over the course of
28:00 ↗ the year
28:04 ↗ mostly the joint meetings
28:06 ↗ between ppc and various other boards and
28:09 ↗ commissions are happening in this first
28:12 ↗ phase where we're identifying policy
28:15 ↗ and so um
28:17 ↗ that work will be completed by um the
28:21 ↗ end of january so i believe
28:23 ↗ or or early february so i think i've
28:26 ↗ listed all the meetings
28:28 ↗ um related to title 18 in that updated
28:32 ↗ calendar for that okay that's helpful
28:35 ↗ good yeah and just one other thing it
28:37 ↗ looks like uh the project the code is
28:39 ↗ broken down into six main topic areas
28:41 ↗ right
28:43 ↗ and uh we'll be primarily involved with
28:46 ↗ it looks like three
28:50 ↗ um i guess in development commission
28:52 ↗ deliberations it seems like
28:55 ↗ a lot of the aspects of code
28:58 ↗ come together and intersect sometimes in
29:00 ↗ our meetings when we're considering
29:01 ↗ applications
29:03 ↗ for example there might be something
29:06 ↗ that would be of interest to us say like
29:11 ↗ a definition of a stream for example
29:14 ↗ that was part of
29:16 ↗ an application we looked at probably
29:18 ↗ within the last year or two
29:20 ↗ but that's under the environment natural
29:23 ↗ environment category i guess
29:26 ↗ will we have visibility or be able to
29:28 ↗ input on that at all or how will that
29:30 ↗ work as the process goes on
29:35 ↗ uh absolutely i'm in terms of visibility
29:38 ↗ absolutely um so we can make that happen
29:41 ↗ any way you you choose to do so if there
29:44 ↗ is a specific interest for
29:47 ↗ few members to be engaged in that
29:49 ↗ process you know the couple ways to go
29:50 ↗ about it i mean you could form your own
29:52 ↗ ad hoc committee as long as it's not a
29:54 ↗ courage open public meeting you know the
29:56 ↗ three of you could take the leadership
29:58 ↗ role and come to those meetings
30:01 ↗ we can meet one-on-one with and everyone
30:04 ↗ we are happy to send out um the first
30:07 ↗ draft um
30:09 ↗ for comments and meet with you we can
30:11 ↗ come to your meeting here to give you a
30:13 ↗ little
30:15 ↗ what work has occurred on that
30:17 ↗ um the so multiple ways to do do it i
30:21 ↗ think the the
30:22 ↗ the
30:23 ↗ problem you identified has been
30:24 ↗ identified in that graph analysis the
30:27 ↗ ditch versus the stream issue um so the
30:30 ↗ whole environmental section you know
30:32 ↗ where we're missing the mark on the best
30:34 ↗ available science what the buffer should
30:35 ↗ be and all that
30:38 ↗ you know environmental board and
30:39 ↗ planning and policy commission are going
30:41 ↗ to be the primary
30:44 ↗ boards and commissions that are going to
30:45 ↗ be getting into the details of that but
30:47 ↗ we're happy to take any feedback in any
30:50 ↗ way shape or form that you think is
30:52 ↗ useful without inundating you with a lot
30:55 ↗ you know those those things are very
30:56 ↗ technical and when we first launched
30:58 ↗ them
30:59 ↗ there was a lot for people to read and
31:01 ↗ it can become overwhelming yeah right
31:04 ↗ okay great thank you
31:06 ↗ and you know as we um get through some
31:09 ↗ of these topics
31:11 ↗ [Music]
31:13 ↗ as well as these um specific
31:16 ↗ interests that you're identifying in the
31:18 ↗ same way that i have included
31:22 ↗ development commission when we were
31:23 ↗ updating the sign code and i would send
31:26 ↗ things to you and some of you would
31:27 ↗ comment and some of you i would not hear
31:30 ↗ from again which is not a commentary
31:32 ↗ it's absolutely fine i think you should
31:35 ↗ be engaged with what you're interested
31:38 ↗ we can always send
31:40 ↗ those kinds of emails to the commission
31:42 ↗ and determine
31:44 ↗ a level of interest if we don't already
31:46 ↗ have a sense of where the commission
31:49 ↗ either individually or as an entire
31:52 ↗ commission
31:53 ↗ what your level of interest is
31:59 ↗ other questions or
32:02 ↗ comments about the materials so far
32:08 ↗ i thought
32:10 ↗ i'm gonna go commit commissioner morgan
32:12 ↗ go ahead oh thank you commissioner so
32:14 ↗ well
32:16 ↗ thank you um
32:17 ↗ again the question i guess on the the
32:20 ↗ as the
32:22 ↗ land use code
32:23 ↗ standards get updated
32:26 ↗ um the say the central issaquah plan and
32:29 ↗ this in the design standards remain as
32:32 ↗ they are
32:33 ↗ what happens if if we start to create or
32:36 ↗ or not we but
32:38 ↗ conflicts get created between
32:40 ↗ title 18 and
32:43 ↗ the central squad standards
32:45 ↗ do they standards stay in place and they
32:48 ↗ still overlay
32:49 ↗ what is in 18 or how does it work
32:52 ↗ yeah the goal is that they will all be
32:54 ↗ part of title 18. so right now they are
32:57 ↗ a separate document
32:58 ↗ um for central issaquah it's not you
33:01 ↗ know it's not part of the the title it's
33:03 ↗ referenced in title 18 but you have to
33:05 ↗ go to a different um document to figure
33:08 ↗ out what's allowed there so the idea is
33:10 ↗ that it will be it'll be folded in so
33:13 ↗ those
33:14 ↗ the vision for uh central isoqua is
33:16 ↗ going to stay the same because that was
33:17 ↗ went through a whole process the
33:19 ↗ sub-area planning process
33:20 ↗ but some of those regulations and
33:22 ↗ details uh will will then live in
33:26 ↗ entitled 18.
33:28 ↗ physically in 518. thank you
33:32 ↗ yeah i was just going to say that i
33:33 ↗ appreciated that setting the context
33:35 ↗ that really uh
33:37 ↗ that really narrowed it down to me i was
33:38 ↗ once i wasn't sure how far and wide we
33:40 ↗ were going to be asked to go but uh this
33:43 ↗ gives this gives a pretty good sense of
33:44 ↗ of what the expectation is thank you
33:50 ↗ other questions or comments
33:54 ↗ another question i guess um commissioner
33:56 ↗ morgan's question reminded me of this
33:58 ↗ currently in title 18 there are a number
34:01 ↗ of places referred to ordinances
34:03 ↗ and then you have to go to a separate
34:05 ↗ document repository to see the
34:08 ↗ ordinances are they are those going to
34:10 ↗ be incorporated in title 18 in this
34:12 ↗ revision or how will that work
34:15 ↗ yeah that is our our intent that we're
34:17 ↗ not you know
34:19 ↗ that that it's all comprehensive it'll
34:21 ↗ be all here rather than in different
34:23 ↗ places so
34:31 ↗ other
34:32 ↗ commissioners have uh comments
34:35 ↗ questions
34:36 ↗ yes this is commissioner commissioner
34:37 ↗ schulte uh thank you minnie for the
34:38 ↗ presentation um
34:40 ↗ regarding
34:42 ↗ you know new development projects coming
34:44 ↗ up in you know 2022 and
34:47 ↗ review of the remainder projects in 2021
34:50 ↗ are they all being grandfathered into
34:52 ↗ the existing title 18 the do these new
34:54 ↗ revisions
34:56 ↗ they won't take effect
34:58 ↗ until after 2022 right and that's the
35:00 ↗ complete package this is not or is this
35:03 ↗ going to be fragmented where you have
35:04 ↗ pieces of title 18 code
35:08 ↗ that taken into effect you know as we're
35:10 ↗ reviewing making changes in 2022 or is
35:13 ↗ the whole package
35:14 ↗ um being approved at the end of 22 2022
35:17 ↗ and that's when everybody else gets
35:18 ↗ grandfathered into that
35:20 ↗ yeah the council adopted a resolution
35:22 ↗ they don't want to do a piecemeal
35:24 ↗ adoption so they you know
35:26 ↗ everything they will be together uh
35:28 ↗ there may be a couple of ordinances
35:30 ↗ because the shoreline has to be approved
35:32 ↗ by department of ecology so we we may
35:34 ↗ separate um shoreline from the rest of
35:37 ↗ it but it'll be
35:38 ↗ it'll the adoption will be together at
35:41 ↗ one time
35:42 ↗ in terms of your other question um so
35:45 ↗ anything that is being currently
35:46 ↗ processed um
35:48 ↗ this code doesn't apply to uh any
35:51 ↗ complete building permit application
35:53 ↗ that's applied before the adoption of
35:55 ↗ the code will be vested to the old code
36:00 ↗ yeah
36:01 ↗ got it thank you
36:02 ↗ and i would even add that um
36:05 ↗ you know we will probably in the
36:07 ↗ ordinance for anything that doesn't have
36:09 ↗ something that's super clear like
36:12 ↗ building permits as many mentioned
36:14 ↗ that's from state law
36:16 ↗ and there are some other things that are
36:17 ↗ very clear in state law when they are
36:20 ↗ vested to regulations
36:23 ↗ but even with the sign code when we
36:25 ↗ adopted the new sign code we
36:27 ↗ specified what was vested when
36:30 ↗ and so we're likely to do that to try
36:33 ↗ and sort out that same kind of question
36:35 ↗ that you have so that it's clear to
36:38 ↗ um uh as clear as we can be going into
36:42 ↗ it um where people stand
36:44 ↗ got it thank you
36:48 ↗ i have that have this question is
36:50 ↗ important go ahead fisher go ahead
36:54 ↗ the vesting question is an important one
36:56 ↗ to be clear on
37:01 ↗ yes
37:02 ↗ we learned a lot about investing under
37:06 ↗ under your guidance that was
37:08 ↗ quite easy yeah it it's usually not that
37:10 ↗ that complicated but i think the
37:12 ↗ development agreement process here kind
37:14 ↗ of adds that layer of complexity on that
37:17 ↗ topic but
37:18 ↗ usually it should be more
37:19 ↗ straightforward
37:23 ↗ uh i have a couple maybe i just had a
37:25 ↗ couple comments here uh
37:27 ↗ question about public engagement as we
37:29 ↗ move forward obviously the
37:31 ↗ um boards that or the commission
37:33 ↗ meetings are
37:35 ↗ are public open to public comment etc
37:37 ↗ are there other
37:38 ↗ forums um either previously already held
37:42 ↗ or as part of the process forward can
37:45 ↗ you explain a little bit about how the
37:46 ↗ public can engage in the process moving
37:48 ↗ forward uh sure um so um you know
37:52 ↗ there's the formal uh boards and
37:54 ↗ commissions process that we have and
37:56 ↗ then the public hearings through the
37:57 ↗ process outside of that
37:59 ↗ we obviously want to reach out to as
38:01 ↗ many people as we can
38:02 ↗ it needs to be a meaningful exercise
38:04 ↗ because this can you know this is too
38:06 ↗ big of a
38:07 ↗ project and too complicated so so what
38:10 ↗ we're what we've intended is a bds
38:13 ↗ planning is the the consultant that's
38:15 ↗ sort of the lead on
38:16 ↗ on the public engagement side of it
38:19 ↗ we have had one meeting with the
38:21 ↗ stakeholders so we've identified the
38:23 ↗ stakeholders based on each of the
38:24 ↗ groupings so for natural environment it
38:27 ↗ was the tribes the vira 8
38:31 ↗ and then the community members that are
38:33 ↗ experts uh the folks that you know say
38:35 ↗ cougar mountain yeah we have a lot of
38:38 ↗ engaged community you know and mount
38:40 ↗ green mountain
38:41 ↗ sound greenway trust so we identified
38:43 ↗ important stakeholders that might have
38:45 ↗ bring in an important perspective on
38:47 ↗ those topics so we met with them
38:49 ↗ uh the questions we're asking them are
38:51 ↗ at a at a more higher level but in those
38:55 ↗ meetings but that's our first touch with
38:58 ↗ them so but if they are engaged and want
39:01 ↗ to provide additional feedback then we
39:02 ↗ will be sending them the draft uh
39:05 ↗ code language when we're ready for that
39:07 ↗ the second meeting we had was with the
39:09 ↗ property owners uh the real estate
39:11 ↗ developers um
39:13 ↗ and uh architects who've engaged in this
39:15 ↗ community um you know that that have had
39:19 ↗ run-ins with the code and have you know
39:22 ↗ good or bad experiences and things like
39:24 ↗ that that nature so
39:26 ↗ so that was a but we were focusing that
39:28 ↗ on and master builders association you
39:31 ↗ know engaging with the stakeholders in
39:32 ↗ that group so we just had that meeting
39:34 ↗ today
39:35 ↗ um and those we're calling them affinity
39:38 ↗ groups but basically a focus group of
39:40 ↗ stakeholders that may have a perspective
39:42 ↗ on that topic
39:44 ↗ um and we produce a summary from that
39:46 ↗ meeting and and will include that
39:49 ↗ um we've also had uh um
39:53 ↗ with a council uh study session to kind
39:56 ↗ of brief them on here's we've wrapped up
39:58 ↗ the natural environment landscaping and
40:00 ↗ open space policy guidance and here we
40:03 ↗ are
40:03 ↗ and you know seeking their um
40:06 ↗ sort of input
40:09 ↗ at a certain point so we we intend to do
40:10 ↗ a few touch points with council prior to
40:13 ↗ act you know rather than bringing
40:15 ↗ everything back to them at the very tail
40:17 ↗ end
40:18 ↗ um there were there's an open
40:20 ↗ house planned
40:21 ↗ uh the challenge with this whole virtual
40:24 ↗ environment you know it both makes it
40:26 ↗ easy for people to engage because they
40:28 ↗ don't have to travel and commute but it
40:30 ↗ also has its limitations because you
40:32 ↗ can't sit around the table and mark up a
40:34 ↗ map you know there are things that um
40:37 ↗ are limiting but also opportunities uh
40:40 ↗ because we can reach out to more people
40:42 ↗ so we're doing our best um in terms of
40:45 ↗ engaging with as many people in a
40:46 ↗ meaningful way that we can
40:49 ↗ yeah you're right it's a large
40:50 ↗ complicated project and
40:52 ↗ so there will be a lot of interested
40:54 ↗ parties so just a related question to
40:55 ↗ that
40:56 ↗ so there's always the possibility of
40:58 ↗ significant scope creep because you'll
41:00 ↗ have a lot of different points of view
41:01 ↗ and things that people would like to see
41:03 ↗ addressed so can you talk a little bit
41:05 ↗ about and we could be part of that
41:07 ↗ potential problem um so can you talk
41:09 ↗ about how you're gonna kind of manage
41:11 ↗ the scope
41:12 ↗ uh and deal with maybe some like ideas
41:14 ↗ or suggestions that may not fit in now
41:17 ↗ sure i think our um so
41:20 ↗ based on this golden outcomes chart as a
41:23 ↗ guiding you know document so at least we
41:25 ↗ have that and we have our long-range
41:27 ↗ plan so
41:28 ↗ but some of these uh asks could be you
41:31 ↗ know a project in itself that that's a
41:33 ↗ year-long project because we need to do
41:36 ↗ some research on that so our intent is
41:39 ↗ that if if we start getting a lot of
41:41 ↗ those kind of requests that we would
41:43 ↗ create a list
41:44 ↗ of that we would include as our
41:46 ↗ recommendation to council but those
41:49 ↗ would be future
41:50 ↗ um kind of um you know parking lot bike
41:53 ↗ barn we've we've come up with a few
41:55 ↗ names of what that list will be called
41:58 ↗ but there will be an opportunity to kind
41:59 ↗ of say if we if we care to get some of
42:03 ↗ this bigger you know issues that are
42:05 ↗ missing in the code done now
42:07 ↗ and then these are important goals and
42:09 ↗ and we want to do these but
42:12 ↗ we need more time we need more
42:14 ↗ conversations um
42:16 ↗ so that's our our sort of plan but
42:18 ↗ you're absolutely right it we we could
42:20 ↗ easily go down
42:22 ↗ on red herrings or or you know down the
42:24 ↗ rabbit hole researching one thing
42:27 ↗ but and and lose that that um
42:30 ↗ what we intend to do
42:32 ↗ yeah we'll have to manage that um we
42:35 ↗ have the ad hoc committee if there are
42:37 ↗ things that come up that are really
42:39 ↗ important then we would go back to ad
42:41 ↗ hoc committee who will then i think will
42:43 ↗ ask the council to weigh in
42:45 ↗ so we'll have to kind of see where where
42:48 ↗ it goes
42:50 ↗ thank you
42:52 ↗ other questions from the commission
42:55 ↗ i had a
42:56 ↗ question can you guys hear me yeah
42:59 ↗ yes
43:00 ↗ okay
43:02 ↗ so i've heard mention of a design review
43:04 ↗ board and i guess uh one do i understand
43:08 ↗ that correctly that there is going to be
43:09 ↗ a design review board
43:11 ↗ and would
43:14 ↗ would the title 18 revisions adopt that
43:17 ↗ process and define that body
43:21 ↗ um you know i i don't know about the
43:22 ↗ design review board discussions lucy may
43:25 ↗ be able to speak to that i haven't heard
43:27 ↗ that yet but definitely the
43:29 ↗ quasi-judicial
43:31 ↗ matters and how we process them
43:34 ↗ is something that council wants us to
43:36 ↗ look at
43:37 ↗ so right now we have these important
43:40 ↗ projects that come to development
43:41 ↗ commission that builds a record and then
43:44 ↗ council does the closed record
43:46 ↗ uh you know
43:47 ↗ is that
43:49 ↗ okay or not okay and what the alternate
43:51 ↗ should be i think those kind of
43:53 ↗ conversations will occur during the
43:55 ↗ process and procedures aspect i'm
43:58 ↗ curious to hear what your guys opinion
44:00 ↗ is and on you know
44:02 ↗ on how you see i mean
44:04 ↗ because that judicial matters you can't
44:06 ↗ talk to each other you can have these
44:08 ↗ conversations with community members
44:10 ↗ outside that you might run into at the
44:12 ↗ grocery store
44:13 ↗ all of that framework in a in a body um
44:17 ↗ is you know made up of seven members and
44:19 ↗ then i think as we were working through
44:21 ↗ the process
44:23 ↗ and procedures for development
44:24 ↗ commission some of the things came up in
44:26 ↗ terms of the alternate you know do they
44:28 ↗ participate in the discussion and and if
44:30 ↗ so but they're not voting members how
44:32 ↗ does that work with the quasi-judicial
44:33 ↗ matter
44:34 ↗ um so this becomes a legal
44:37 ↗ thing
44:38 ↗ that you know
44:40 ↗ definitely there'll be a policy um
44:42 ↗ discussion but that then also our
44:45 ↗ insurance authority may also need to
44:47 ↗ weigh in you know do we have our
44:48 ↗ processes right
44:51 ↗ but i'm curious to hear what how you
44:53 ↗ guys feel
44:55 ↗ what comes in front of you you know um
44:57 ↗ how that works or doesn't work from your
44:59 ↗ perspective
45:03 ↗ i'll just say i'm unaware of a design
45:05 ↗ review board
45:07 ↗ did i completely uh
45:09 ↗ make that up i think where i've heard
45:12 ↗ that mentioned and um
45:14 ↗ but possibly i didn't and uh i was
45:17 ↗ mostly being protective of the work we
45:21 ↗ where are the designers
45:25 ↗ it is a pretty common practice in a lot
45:27 ↗ of cities to have architectural review
45:30 ↗ boards or
45:31 ↗ design review boards um but they're pro
45:34 ↗ here i think the process is everything
45:36 ↗ is bundled together in one project and
45:38 ↗ it comes you know all different pieces
45:40 ↗ whether it's critical areas or you know
45:42 ↗ it's all comprehensive sort of a site
45:45 ↗ master site plan or whatever the term
45:48 ↗ here is comes in front of you but a lot
45:50 ↗ of cities do break it up into this is an
45:53 ↗ expert you know this is a decision that
45:55 ↗ needs to occur first you need to figure
45:57 ↗ out what your buffers are for your
46:00 ↗ wetlands and your streams before you go
46:02 ↗ design your the rest of the building so
46:06 ↗ i guess those are conversations we will
46:07 ↗ have
46:08 ↗ and and architectural review boards uh
46:11 ↗ could you know are made up of
46:13 ↗ sometimes sometimes cities have planning
46:15 ↗ policy commissions that wear the same
46:17 ↗ hat they're they're the legislative
46:19 ↗ advisory body but they also do
46:22 ↗ design review
46:23 ↗ other cities like seattle have
46:25 ↗ professionals on the design review board
46:27 ↗ they they're made up of landscape
46:29 ↗ architects and
46:30 ↗ you know architects and and then and
46:32 ↗ then they're focused on an early
46:35 ↗ guidance uh decision and then come back
46:38 ↗ for the final decision so it's all over
46:40 ↗ the place in terms of what the right
46:42 ↗ thing is and i think isabel will decide
46:44 ↗ the community will decide what what's
46:46 ↗ right here it our job is going to be to
46:49 ↗ make sure it's legal and it protects
46:52 ↗ the city in terms of we we do it right
46:56 ↗ you know
47:00 ↗ other questions
47:03 ↗ i think
47:04 ↗ john may have
47:06 ↗ had a question at one point did i see
47:08 ↗ your hand go up john yeah i just need a
47:10 ↗ clarification on on um
47:13 ↗ how title 18 works with say the
47:16 ↗ international building code or
47:18 ↗ or nfpa does does does title 18 just
47:22 ↗ adopt the
47:23 ↗ version of the ibc or nfpa i i just want
47:26 ↗ to know understand the
47:29 ↗ the i guess the um
47:32 ↗ sort of precedence
47:33 ↗ whether
47:34 ↗ if ibc
47:36 ↗ conflicts with the title 18
47:38 ↗ determination does that
47:40 ↗ how does that work
47:42 ↗ good question um so international
47:46 ↗ building code is adopted in our title
47:48 ↗ 16. so that is a standalone code um
47:53 ↗ you know focus is life safety of the
47:55 ↗ buildings and the design yeah so that
47:57 ↗ that
47:58 ↗ will proceed you
48:00 ↗ that's a whole another review so title
48:04 ↗ should not conflict with um
48:06 ↗ international building code but if it
48:08 ↗ does we should we need to have a process
48:10 ↗ and say the most stringent applies or
48:14 ↗ you know usually there's some general
48:16 ↗ provisions in the code in title 18
48:17 ↗ that'll say if there's a conflict and
48:20 ↗ among any um different titles of uh
48:23 ↗ basically municipal code then the most
48:25 ↗ stringent will apply or there's a
48:28 ↗ process to
48:29 ↗ to have you know the director make a
48:31 ↗ decision decision or determination based
48:33 ↗ on this criteria
48:35 ↗ um the the fire code that's a separate
48:38 ↗ thing um but it's kind of getting uh you
48:41 ↗ know into each other's territory now
48:43 ↗ because as you know the building code
48:45 ↗ has a very
48:46 ↗ strong
48:48 ↗ changes for the energy code
48:50 ↗ as we look at climate change in what
48:53 ↗ needs to occur to make buildings more
48:55 ↗ energy efficient
48:57 ↗ if the community decides to add some
48:59 ↗ additional requirements in title 18
49:02 ↗ you know that that could become an issue
49:05 ↗ in terms of implementation as well
49:08 ↗ the ideal thing is that the expert code
49:11 ↗ should be elevated if that's the desire
49:13 ↗ not have something else adopted here and
49:16 ↗ another layer of um you know regulations
49:19 ↗ on top of that
49:22 ↗ thank you
49:25 ↗ good question good good response
49:28 ↗ uh other
49:30 ↗ questions from the commission
49:34 ↗ so so i'll just throw in one more just
49:36 ↗ as i was thinking about this and
49:38 ↗ as we move forward and we're thinking
49:40 ↗ about you know how we would engage on
49:43 ↗ the process i think for me at least
49:45 ↗ it'll be useful to think about where we
49:47 ↗ had
49:48 ↗ you know confusion or
49:51 ↗ tensions between codes and standards as
49:54 ↗ we are trying to apply those to to real
49:56 ↗ projects we already mentioned the one
49:59 ↗ that was already mentioned about i think
50:02 ↗ that um
50:04 ↗ commissioner sanford raised um related
50:06 ↗ is it a ditch or is it a string question
50:08 ↗ we went around and around what kind of
50:10 ↗ buffers do we need to apply for example
50:12 ↗ was one area where it was there was lack
50:13 ↗ of clarity
50:14 ↗ um also i think there's some issues
50:16 ↗ around the role
50:17 ↗ the commission plays in some of the
50:19 ↗ decision making and the breadth of
50:20 ↗ decision making on some things so i know
50:23 ↗ we're going to get into the process and
50:24 ↗ procedures piece so thinking through
50:26 ↗ that so there's clarity about our
50:29 ↗ our responsibility
50:32 ↗ and then i think
50:33 ↗ like i mentioned examples are really
50:36 ↗ helpful i think um when i'm thinking
50:38 ↗ about these
50:41 ↗ various projects they you know
50:44 ↗ unfortunately reliving some of the
50:45 ↗ things that may not have gone too well
50:47 ↗ might help us i think through the
50:49 ↗ process but i would also
50:51 ↗ think about things that went well too we
50:53 ↗ want to make sure that we don't
50:55 ↗ do things that undo the things that are
50:57 ↗ working
50:58 ↗ so i think it's kind of a two-sided
51:01 ↗ thought process for me at least
51:05 ↗ any other comments or questions from the
51:08 ↗ commission on this
51:11 ↗ is there additional information from
51:13 ↗ staff on this topic tonight
51:17 ↗ [Music]
51:18 ↗ excellent well this is the this is this
51:20 ↗ this is the shooting of the gun at the
51:23 ↗ starting line right for us
51:26 ↗ so here here we go and it's a marathon
51:28 ↗ this isn't a sprint yeah
51:30 ↗ yeah but but i i you know i'll say this
51:33 ↗ thing that as we as you get the packet
51:35 ↗ if you
51:36 ↗ um want to talk you know please reach
51:38 ↗ out and we're here to assist and break
51:41 ↗ it down into into bite-sized pieces it
51:44 ↗ can sometimes you know may not be for
51:46 ↗ this board and commission but but others
51:48 ↗ that don't see development projects and
51:50 ↗ and others um you know we want to make
51:53 ↗ sure that we we are there to assist you
51:56 ↗ figure the different pieces out so good
51:59 ↗ thank you we appreciate that
52:05 ↗ can i clarify then to you mentioned i
52:07 ↗ think many that the um
52:11 ↗ uh it would it's non-judicial
52:13 ↗ so that if there are things if there's
52:15 ↗ communication that we have with regard
52:18 ↗ ideas recommendations like that it can
52:20 ↗ include like emails with all
52:22 ↗ commissioners
52:23 ↗ without issues yeah it's a legislative
52:26 ↗ process so yeah that's tricky for you
52:28 ↗ guys because you you know we train you
52:30 ↗ quality don't talk to each other this is
52:32 ↗ a little bit of a different um
52:34 ↗ thing so as long as you're not violating
52:36 ↗ the open public meeting act so you know
52:39 ↗ if four of you get together for lunch
52:40 ↗ and talk about i think we did some
52:42 ↗ training our attorneys our city clerk
52:43 ↗ did some training in open public
52:45 ↗ meetings act with this board right so as
52:48 ↗ long as we're not in violation of that
52:50 ↗ we are free to talk to each other yeah
52:55 ↗ well we also have to be careful about
52:56 ↗ serial meetings through email though too
52:58 ↗ so i think we have to be a little
53:00 ↗ careful
53:01 ↗ so and and i know lucy has been good
53:03 ↗ about intervening
53:05 ↗ when there's a question or where we
53:07 ↗ might be getting close so to
53:09 ↗ that concern so
53:12 ↗ but i i appreciate and we should take
53:14 ↗ advantage of the staff uh availability
53:17 ↗ uh to
53:18 ↗ answer questions take suggestions too
53:21 ↗ i think that's good
53:23 ↗ and then as far as the joint meetings
53:25 ↗ real quick on the process board so we'll
53:26 ↗ be meeting with the ppc
53:29 ↗ and
53:30 ↗ at those meetings we'll be
53:32 ↗ trying to provide input
53:34 ↗ to essentially they're the lead
53:36 ↗ um commission
53:38 ↗ in the process so we'll be providing
53:40 ↗ input to the to the
53:42 ↗ finding policy commission
53:44 ↗ yeah i mean it's a joint meeting you you
53:46 ↗ know we want to engage you guys just as
53:48 ↗ much as the planning and policy
53:49 ↗ commission but the state law and the
53:52 ↗ city's charter is
53:54 ↗ in order to adopt a regulation city
53:56 ↗ council cannot do it until they get a
53:58 ↗ recommendation from planning and policy
54:00 ↗ commission so that's the formality of
54:02 ↗ their role is that they officially have
54:04 ↗ to make the recommendation
54:05 ↗ but it's a joint thing of you know you
54:08 ↗ bring your perspective and have a robust
54:10 ↗ discussion with the board um and that
54:13 ↗ that everyone's uh input is taken into
54:16 ↗ account well
54:17 ↗ you know
54:18 ↗ um but yes the the formal deliberations
54:21 ↗ and recommendations will come from the
54:23 ↗ planning policy commission okay great
54:25 ↗ one of the things i would add um to that
54:28 ↗ is it's um
54:30 ↗ or the commissioners who participated
54:32 ↗ when we were develop
54:34 ↗ developing and adopting the
54:36 ↗ architectural standards for old town
54:38 ↗ single family
54:40 ↗ it's a lot like that that
54:44 ↗ commission
54:46 ↗ participation with ppc
54:49 ↗ gives them insight you know they can't
54:51 ↗ be experts on everything and yet we ask
54:53 ↗ them to make a recommendation on
54:55 ↗ everything and by
54:57 ↗ having these joint meetings we um uh
55:00 ↗ allow
55:01 ↗ to sort of um
55:03 ↗ fertilize the ground with your
55:05 ↗ experience and wisdom and insights
55:09 ↗ to help build their
55:11 ↗ base of knowledge
55:13 ↗ in making that ultimate recommendation
55:19 ↗ yeah i remember that process and i think
55:20 ↗ that worked well and
55:22 ↗ it's a large group so challenging i
55:24 ↗ think for
55:25 ↗ everybody to kind of manage through that
55:27 ↗ but it worked it seemed to work pretty
55:28 ↗ well
55:30 ↗ although we did that in person if i
55:31 ↗ remember right not virtually so yeah
55:34 ↗ that's the challenge you know that's the
55:36 ↗ seven of you seven of them 15 of them 15
55:39 ↗ of you in a virtual environment we want
55:41 ↗ to hear from all of you
55:42 ↗ um but um yeah so
55:46 ↗ there are some some challenges like that
55:48 ↗ that we
55:49 ↗ have to overcome
55:52 ↗ okay
55:54 ↗ any
55:55 ↗ kind of last call here for any other
55:56 ↗ questions or comments on this topic
56:01 ↗ okay hearing none uh move on to uh any
56:04 ↗ public comments i don't know
56:06 ↗ if we have anybody in the meeting this
56:08 ↗ evening
56:09 ↗ that would like to come and um they have
56:11 ↗ raised their hands so i'm going to um
56:15 ↗ make them a panelist
56:23 ↗ you have been elevated to a panelist and
56:26 ↗ have been unmuted
56:31 ↗ oh hold on
56:33 ↗ sorry i'm in the dark you're in my
56:36 ↗ you're in my shipping room
56:38 ↗ so first
56:40 ↗ i love it
56:42 ↗ to hear you guys because you actually
56:45 ↗ know what you're talking about and up to
56:48 ↗ this point in time
56:50 ↗ this code update
56:52 ↗ has been
56:53 ↗ sort of filled with people who are new
56:56 ↗ to the process and have never really had
56:59 ↗ to deal with
57:01 ↗ what a change of code might mean
57:03 ↗ and that's really hard so it is a relief
57:07 ↗ to me to feel
57:08 ↗ that you all have an education level and
57:12 ↗ experience behind it to make cogent
57:14 ↗ comment so
57:15 ↗ thank you so much because this is
57:18 ↗ hard
57:19 ↗ uh but i of course have comments
57:25 ↗ i have had a
57:30 ↗ opinion throughout this
57:32 ↗ um that
57:34 ↗ when we are using an old comprehensive
57:37 ↗ plan because our land use
57:40 ↗ section of our comprehensive plan
57:43 ↗ is old and it does not have the goals
57:47 ↗ and objectives that are pointing us
57:49 ↗ toward our new future
57:52 ↗ that we either a need to change our
57:54 ↗ comprehensive plan in advance which is
57:57 ↗ what our what our world tells us we're
57:59 ↗ supposed to do
58:01 ↗ or we need to do it simultaneously
58:04 ↗ and so i've come to the conclusion
58:07 ↗ that
58:09 ↗ have to
58:10 ↗ simultaneously
58:12 ↗ change our code
58:14 ↗ and then
58:16 ↗ backtrack
58:17 ↗ and change our comprehensive plan to
58:20 ↗ bring it
58:21 ↗ up to date
58:22 ↗ and as part of that we actually need to
58:24 ↗ change
58:26 ↗ somewhere i don't know if it's code or
58:27 ↗ what we have to change our processes so
58:30 ↗ this is what we always do
58:32 ↗ because up to this point in time that's
58:34 ↗ how we always do it no matter how we're
58:37 ↗ supposed to do it so somewhere we need
58:40 ↗ to establish that when we are changing
58:42 ↗ our strategies then we need to always
58:45 ↗ groom through our comprehensive plan and
58:48 ↗ bring it into the now because our
58:50 ↗ comprehensive plan is always lagging
58:52 ↗ so for someone to say that we need to go
58:54 ↗ to our comprehensive plan and have
58:58 ↗ it point us into the future
59:02 ↗ that language is old and it cannot point
59:05 ↗ us into the future that we want
59:08 ↗ uh so i read the comp plan a lot and
59:11 ↗ it's a perpetual frustration
59:14 ↗ so for example our comprehensive plan
59:17 ↗ has a lot of language about no net loss
59:20 ↗ and what we really need to do is focus
59:23 ↗ on environmental enhancement we no
59:26 ↗ longer can afford to say we just aren't
59:28 ↗ going to lose ground we actually need to
59:30 ↗ gain ground and that needs to be a
59:33 ↗ comprehensive plan change and it's sort
59:35 ↗ of what the world is providing for us
59:37 ↗ anyway so that was an example
59:40 ↗ in reviewing what mini was presenting
59:45 ↗ i think you all should have a large say
59:47 ↗ in terrain management because you all
59:50 ↗ often have to deal with the language
59:53 ↗ about terrain i'm sure you remember the
59:55 ↗ excruciating conversations about
59:58 ↗ chasing development up the hill and how
1:00:00 ↗ to protect trees and where you can have
1:00:02 ↗ retaining walls and so i think you have
1:00:05 ↗ a lot to say on this topic so i would
1:00:07 ↗ expressly ask for this to be brought
1:00:10 ↗ to you along with the environmental
1:00:13 ↗ board
1:00:14 ↗ uh and then because i tend to be a
1:00:17 ↗ problem with the quasi-judicial
1:00:19 ↗ situation
1:00:24 ↗ think that we in the city of issaquah
1:00:26 ↗ use the quasi-judicial
1:00:30 ↗ thing as a as a blockade as a barrier
1:00:35 ↗ uh and i don't think it needs to be that
1:00:38 ↗ way i think that's just how it's been
1:00:40 ↗ interpreted for you all
1:00:44 ↗ then that brings me to the what is
1:00:46 ↗ included in quasi-judicial and our code
1:00:53 ↗ shockingly did not seem to require that
1:00:56 ↗ all of the public comment on
1:00:57 ↗ automatically be
1:01:00 ↗ considered quasi-judicial so i wasn't
1:01:04 ↗ able to understand whether
1:01:08 ↗ whether that extent of quasi-judicial
1:01:11 ↗ was going to be included in this code
1:01:13 ↗ update and if so you all need that
1:01:17 ↗ also in this if all of this is changing
1:01:20 ↗ then you all need new
1:01:21 ↗ what i'm going to euphemize is green
1:01:24 ↗ sheets
1:01:25 ↗ because all the rules and regulations
1:01:28 ↗ will be different and maybe there even
1:01:31 ↗ needs to be a conversation about whether
1:01:33 ↗ that green sheet or tick box method that
1:01:37 ↗ you use to understand whether you're
1:01:39 ↗ adhering to code could be reconsidered
1:01:42 ↗ or reimagined to something that works
1:01:45 ↗ even better i don't know what other
1:01:47 ↗ cities use but when i think of all the
1:01:50 ↗ mechanisms that you use to try to
1:01:53 ↗ understand whether a development fits
1:01:55 ↗ with the code those tools will
1:01:58 ↗ need to be changed
1:02:03 ↗ and then one
1:02:04 ↗ one last little bit
1:02:06 ↗ there's the ad-hoc council committee
1:02:08 ↗ chart
1:02:09 ↗ uh and
1:02:11 ↗ two out of three of the council members
1:02:13 ↗ expressly said that this
1:02:16 ↗ was just a guideline
1:02:18 ↗ and things that you would consider to be
1:02:22 ↗ important
1:02:23 ↗ can be
1:02:25 ↗ added and discussed it is not a limiter
1:02:28 ↗ it was just the baseline to begin
1:02:32 ↗ and so i don't want y'all to feel
1:02:34 ↗ constrained if you have
1:02:37 ↗ ideas that you think are important that
1:02:40 ↗ are not on that chart bring them forth
1:02:42 ↗ it is not the council saying this is
1:02:45 ↗ what is set for you to discuss that was
1:02:48 ↗ not the intent
1:02:52 ↗ goodness knows i'm done that's the end
1:02:55 ↗ of my list
1:02:56 ↗ and i just i just hope you all can focus
1:03:00 ↗ your attention because you know how
1:03:02 ↗ important i think this is
1:03:04 ↗ to take issaquah
1:03:06 ↗ into a much better easier future that
1:03:10 ↗ that just is
1:03:11 ↗ is straightforward
1:03:14 ↗ simplified yet
1:03:17 ↗ so um thank you again
1:03:21 ↗ thank you miss marsh
1:03:23 ↗ are there other
1:03:24 ↗ people
1:03:25 ↗ on the call that would like to
1:03:28 ↗ speak um all other attendees are the
1:03:33 ↗ recording secretary and the media
1:03:35 ↗ specialist great
1:03:38 ↗ we'll close the public comment period um
1:03:41 ↗ lucy any updates
1:03:43 ↗ on council
1:03:48 ↗ probably many can update as well as i
1:03:51 ↗ can the only thing i would add is that
1:03:53 ↗ the sign code went into effect september
1:03:57 ↗ and um
1:03:59 ↗ and i thank you for all the work that um
1:04:02 ↗ many of you did on that um
1:04:05 ↗ and i don't think of any other council
1:04:07 ↗ updates many do you have some
1:04:10 ↗ um you know nothing that impacts you all
1:04:13 ↗ um we are taking our fee um ordinances
1:04:17 ↗ monday so
1:04:18 ↗ or tuesday uh so we're increasing a
1:04:21 ↗ nominal
1:04:22 ↗ cpi indexed fees so that got adopted for
1:04:25 ↗ development applications so just a five
1:04:28 ↗ percent increase it'll get adopted on
1:04:30 ↗ november 1st with the rest of the budget
1:04:33 ↗ we did uh hold a
1:04:35 ↗ study session with council on the title
1:04:38 ↗ 18 um got some feedback from them about
1:04:42 ↗ you know make things easier to read and
1:04:44 ↗ and all that kind of stuff so
1:04:47 ↗ and things sign code
1:04:50 ↗ yeah i don't think there's anything that
1:04:51 ↗ impacts you guys beyond that
1:04:56 ↗ terms of upcoming meetings um
1:05:00 ↗ we are um i believe the next meeting um
1:05:05 ↗ will be the october 20th where i'm
1:05:08 ↗ currently planning to bring rules and
1:05:10 ↗ procedures to you
1:05:12 ↗ um after some of our
1:05:14 ↗ past experiences we want to have a clear
1:05:16 ↗ guideline
1:05:18 ↗ um for
1:05:19 ↗ the commission this is based on the
1:05:21 ↗ rules and procedures that most of the
1:05:23 ↗ other boards and commissions use
1:05:26 ↗ so we'll bring that for discussion and
1:05:28 ↗ adoption
1:05:32 ↗ october 28th is our first um joint ppc
1:05:37 ↗ dc meeting
1:05:38 ↗ about a week in advance you will receive
1:05:41 ↗ these
1:05:42 ↗ memos memos that we were referring to
1:05:45 ↗ that will
1:05:46 ↗ sort of frame that discussion
1:05:49 ↗ and then um
1:05:50 ↗ there may be
1:05:52 ↗ your regular meeting is on november 3rd
1:05:56 ↗ um however if it's needed um we will
1:06:00 ↗ have the november 4th
1:06:05 ↗ joint meeting with pec to continue the
1:06:08 ↗ discussion um we're not sure that's
1:06:10 ↗ going to be necessary but it is on your
1:06:11 ↗ calendar in case it's needed
1:06:14 ↗ and then uh november 17th we're
1:06:17 ↗ currently anticipating a community
1:06:19 ↗ conference
1:06:23 ↗ we have a busy schedule from now to the
1:06:25 ↗ end of the year
1:06:26 ↗ well i'm bringing this jewelry is quite
1:06:27 ↗ full there um i believe three
1:06:31 ↗ joint meetings with ppc currently
1:06:33 ↗ scheduled
1:06:36 ↗ great
1:06:38 ↗ is there any other business for the
1:06:40 ↗ commission tonight
1:06:43 ↗ unless there are any questions from
1:06:45 ↗ other commissioners on the schedule or
1:06:47 ↗ other items
1:06:50 ↗ um i would like to once again um
1:06:53 ↗ thank you lucy for setting up the tour
1:06:56 ↗ last week to get out and look at
1:06:58 ↗ properties and compare notes and things
1:07:01 ↗ like that very helpful
1:07:02 ↗ yep i agree
1:07:04 ↗ thank you
1:07:09 ↗ uh i think that concludes our business
1:07:11 ↗ for this evening i will adjourn our
1:07:13 ↗ meeting
1:07:14 ↗ have a good evening everybody
Approved minutes
Extracted from the next meeting's packet, where this meeting's minutes were approved as a consent-calendar attachment.
Open PDF

Attendance

Council / Members (7)
Administration/Staff/Others Present: Michael Brennan
Lucy Sloman
Land Dev. Manager Kevin Price
Minnie Dhaliwal
CP&D Director Brooke Shore Patty Dillon Richard Sanford Arthur Schulte Richard Sowa Jon Ikeda
Alternate Mel Morgan
Alternate