Development Commission · Wednesday, August 17, 2022 · City Council Digest

2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES

Minutes of July 6, 2022

packet pp.5–14

Open packet at p.5 ↗

Staff report:

MINUTES Special Meeting DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION 6:00 p.m. Wednesday, July 6, 2022

Minutes of July 20, 2022

packet pp.15–24

Previously discussed: Planning Policy Commission · Jul 28, 2022

Open packet at p.15 ↗

Staff report:

MINUTES Special Joint Meeting PLANNING POLICY COMMISSION & DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION 6:30 p.m. - Thursday, July 20, 2022

5. REPORTS

City Council Update

Holly Keeton, Senior Planner

6. OTHER BUSINESS / ANNOUNCEMENTS

Upcoming Schedule

packet pp.85

▶ Watch from 1:42:42 Open packet at p.85 ↗

Staff report:

OTHER BUSINESS / ANNOUNCEMENTS a) 2022 Development Commission Schedule (tentative) (updated 8/11/2022)

2797 segments .txt ↗

0:07 ↗ good evening and welcome

0:09 ↗ i'd like to call the august 17th meeting

0:11 ↗ of the city of issaquah's development

0:13 ↗ commission to order at 7 pm

0:16 ↗ as a reminder we do still have a remote

0:19 ↗ aspect to our meetings this means both

0:21 ↗ staff and members of the public may be

0:23 ↗ participating in the meeting remotely

0:25 ↗ via webex

0:27 ↗ so our first item of business tonight is

0:29 ↗ to take action on meeting minutes for

0:31 ↗ july 6 and july 20th we have in our

0:33 ↗ agenda packet

0:35 ↗ are there any corrections to the july 6

0:37 ↗ meetings provided in the packet

0:41 ↗ hearing none the minutes are approved

0:43 ↗ and are there any corrections to july

0:45 ↗ 20th minutes in the agenda packet

0:49 ↗ thank you hearing none the minutes are

0:50 ↗ approved

0:52 ↗ next i'd like to open the floor for any

0:54 ↗ members of the public in person or

0:56 ↗ virtually who would like to make a

0:58 ↗ general comment not about the towns on

1:01 ↗ issaquah project but on general topics

1:04 ↗ there will be an opportunity later in

1:05 ↗ the meeting for those who'd like to

1:07 ↗ comment about the project on tonight's

1:09 ↗ agenda

1:10 ↗ those who are in person and signed up in

1:12 ↗ advance to make comments will be called

1:14 ↗ on first

1:15 ↗ if you're in the room and you didn't

1:17 ↗ sign up i will ask for other speakers

1:19 ↗ before closing this portion of the

1:21 ↗ meeting

1:23 ↗ if you're joining us by computer or

1:25 ↗ smartphone via webex and you'd like to

1:27 ↗ make a comment please raise your virtual

1:29 ↗ hand this varies by device

1:33 ↗ one option may be to go to the

1:34 ↗ participant panel and choose the raise

1:37 ↗ hand icon in the lower right corner it

1:39 ↗ may also be located on the under the

1:41 ↗ reactions menu or the more menu

1:44 ↗ if you're on the phone and not a

1:45 ↗ computer press star 3 on your phone

1:49 ↗ for those making comments please direct

1:51 ↗ them to the development commission

1:53 ↗ for in-person attendees please step up

1:55 ↗ to the lectern for meeting attendees

1:57 ↗ participating virtually when you're

1:59 ↗ recognized please unmute your microphone

2:02 ↗ when it's your turn to speak state your

2:04 ↗ name each time before speaking

2:07 ↗ speak clearly and especially if you're

2:09 ↗ attending remotely pause frequently and

2:12 ↗ please limit your comments to five

2:14 ↗ minutes if you're attending virtually

2:16 ↗ and do not respond after your name or

2:18 ↗ phone number is called or if your

2:19 ↗ connection is lost the meeting will need

2:21 ↗ to proceed you're encouraged to rejoin

2:24 ↗ the meeting if you're able to do so

2:27 ↗ mr padua has anyone signed up to make

2:29 ↗ general public comments tonight yes sir

2:32 ↗ we have several members of the audience

2:33 ↗ signed up um

2:36 ↗ but in recognition of tonight's public

2:38 ↗ hearing is there anyone that wants to

2:40 ↗ make public comment on general public

2:42 ↗ comment not on the public hearing at

2:43 ↗ this time

2:44 ↗ can you raise your hand

2:47 ↗ the no chair no one wants to make

2:48 ↗ general comment at this time

2:51 ↗ alrighty thank you is there anyone

2:53 ↗ online who would like to make a general

2:55 ↗ comment

2:56 ↗ not seeing any raised hands

3:02 ↗ no chair

3:03 ↗ okay thank you

3:04 ↗ so we'll move on to the main agenda item

3:06 ↗ of the evening the community conference

3:08 ↗ for towns on 7th

3:10 ↗ the purpose of this meeting is to

3:12 ↗ provide the community an opportunity to

3:14 ↗ participate in the permitting process

3:17 ↗ generate discussion

3:18 ↗ and understand the proposal with

3:20 ↗ particular focus on critical areas on

3:23 ↗ and off the project site

3:25 ↗ the order of tonight's meeting will be

3:27 ↗ staff presentation first and then there

3:29 ↗ will be an applicant presentation there

3:32 ↗ will then be opportunity for public

3:33 ↗ comment and finally comment and

3:36 ↗ questions by the development commission

3:38 ↗ so first we'll proceed with staff's

3:40 ↗ presentation i believe miss holly keaton

3:44 ↗ is ready to go so miss keaton please go

3:46 ↗ ahead with your presentation whenever

3:48 ↗ you are ready

3:53 ↗ good evening thank you and thank you

3:55 ↗ everyone for participating tonight and

3:58 ↗ taking time out of your evening to be

4:00 ↗ here to provide comments and to be

4:02 ↗ involved

4:04 ↗ i will start my presentation in just a

4:07 ↗ moment please note that in the virtual

4:09 ↗ world we do have just a slight delay

4:26 ↗ okay so

4:27 ↗ tonight we are having a community

4:30 ↗ conference

4:31 ↗ and the purpose of the community

4:33 ↗ conference as was previously mentioned

4:40 ↗ is to encourage early public

4:43 ↗ participation and to foster discussion

4:47 ↗ between the community the development

4:48 ↗ commission and the applicant and look at

4:51 ↗ big picture issues

4:53 ↗ and to work together

4:55 ↗ to allow the development commission and

4:58 ↗ the community

4:59 ↗ to provide creative ideas possible

5:01 ↗ solutions and feedback to the applicant

5:04 ↗ on their project proposal

5:08 ↗ this project proposal is in the south

5:11 ↗ portion of central issaquah at the

5:13 ↗ intersection of newport way and

5:16 ↗ northwest hawley

5:17 ↗ it is approximately 1.3 acres

5:21 ↗ the proposal is 29 home units

5:25 ↗ and it is proposed to be in separate

5:28 ↗ seven separate buildings

5:30 ↗ there will be

5:31 ↗ 58 parking stalls that

5:34 ↗ will be required with those with those

5:36 ↗ individual units

5:38 ↗ an internal access road is proposed with

5:41 ↗ a through block passage

5:44 ↗ and frontage improvements along 7th

5:46 ↗ avenue holley and newport

5:52 ↗ the permitting process generally

5:54 ↗ speaking is that the applicant will

5:57 ↗ be submitting shortly after this meeting

6:00 ↗ after they are able to hear

6:02 ↗ comments from the public and the

6:04 ↗ development commission and consider any

6:06 ↗ impacts to their current plans

6:09 ↗ they will be proposing a binding site

6:11 ↗ plan and site development permit which

6:13 ↗ will be reviewed along with cipa

6:16 ↗ once staff has done review of the

6:18 ↗ proposal and is able to provide a

6:20 ↗ recommendation to the development

6:22 ↗ commission we will come back to the

6:24 ↗ development commission and the

6:25 ↗ development commission will hold a

6:27 ↗ public hearing

6:29 ↗ if the development commission is able to

6:31 ↗ approve what is proposed the applicant

6:34 ↗ will be able to move forward with

6:36 ↗ construction permits

6:41 ↗ to go a little bit more in depth on the

6:42 ↗ site

6:43 ↗ as i mentioned earlier it's about 1.3

6:46 ↗ acres and it is comprised of a total of

6:49 ↗ six parcels they are listed over on the

6:51 ↗ left hand side of the slide

6:54 ↗ this is within the central issaquah area

6:57 ↗ and it is in the mixed use residential

7:00 ↗ zone

7:02 ↗ the proposed project is aligned with the

7:04 ↗ comprehensive plan

7:07 ↗ the applicable standards are found

7:09 ↗ within central issaquad development and

7:11 ↗ design standards and the architectural

7:14 ↗ and urban design manual also applies

7:18 ↗ the applicant has proposed arts and

7:20 ↗ crafts architectural style

7:22 ↗ the urban design manual outlines that

7:25 ↗ the key components to that architectural

7:28 ↗ style are that the masking is

7:30 ↗ asymmetrical

7:31 ↗ that it is comprised of steeply pitched

7:33 ↗ roofs

7:34 ↗ gabled or hipped roofs and dormers

7:37 ↗ intersecting ridges and upper level

7:39 ↗ balconies

7:40 ↗ this scale should be no greater than

7:42 ↗ five stories in height and there should

7:45 ↗ be height variation to add visual

7:48 ↗ interest

7:49 ↗ the materials for arts and craft style

7:51 ↗ are

7:53 ↗ rustic stones stucco brick

7:56 ↗ and simulated wood

7:58 ↗ as well as real wood

8:00 ↗ masonry base and decorative

8:03 ↗ brick patterns throughout

8:06 ↗ a maximum of three of these types of

8:08 ↗ materials may be used

8:10 ↗ and the color palette is to be warm

8:12 ↗ whites grays olives browns

8:16 ↗ and

8:17 ↗ natural colors such as wood stone and

8:20 ↗ masonry

8:23 ↗ the windows should be double hung fixed

8:25 ↗ or a combination thereof rectangular or

8:28 ↗ arched with a brick or stone surround

8:31 ↗ they should be simple

8:33 ↗ and the doors should kind of match this

8:35 ↗ design so they should also be

8:39 ↗ aligned with the style of the windows

8:41 ↗ and glass lit or full light glass doors

8:44 ↗ and brick and stone brick and or stone

8:47 ↗ surround should be at the doorway as

8:49 ↗ well

8:50 ↗ the roof should be asphalt shingles

8:52 ↗ medium to dark earth tones

8:55 ↗ wood or simulated wood shingles

8:57 ↗ plate concrete or clay

9:01 ↗ this project will

9:03 ↗ require

9:04 ↗ improvements to circulation facilities

9:07 ↗ it will require both frontage

9:09 ↗ improvements as mentioned earlier

9:11 ↗ and through block passage so first let's

9:13 ↗ look at the streets where the project

9:16 ↗ runs

9:17 ↗ the sprints on newport way which is

9:19 ↗ considered a parkway in the central

9:21 ↗ island standards

9:23 ↗ and the development standards that apply

9:25 ↗ to a parkway are a six foot sidewalk six

9:29 ↗ foot landscaping strip

9:31 ↗ five foot bike lane 11 foot travel lanes

9:34 ↗ and 12 foot median and turn lanes

9:38 ↗ there is a project already in the works

9:40 ↗ through public works

9:42 ↗ city projects and it is um

9:45 ↗ a roundabout that is going to be

9:47 ↗ completing the design phase pretty soon

9:50 ↗ and and it will be implemented in the

9:52 ↗ next uh probably five

9:54 ↗ years or so

9:56 ↗ so the developer is required

9:59 ↗ to work very closely with

10:01 ↗ with public works and cpd community

10:04 ↗ planning and development on the design

10:06 ↗ of the frontage for newport

10:08 ↗ and that discussion uh is ongoing

10:11 ↗ northwest hawley and 7th avenue are

10:14 ↗ currently unclassified streets and the

10:16 ↗ central isoqual plan and they are to be

10:19 ↗ determined at time of development

10:21 ↗ communication with public works has

10:23 ↗ identified that the most

10:25 ↗ closely related street classification is

10:27 ↗ a core street

10:29 ↗ for both of these

10:31 ↗ however the difference is that on 7th we

10:33 ↗ will be requiring on-street parking

10:37 ↗ so

10:38 ↗ each street will require eight foot

10:40 ↗ sidewalks six-foot landscaping strip

10:42 ↗ five-foot bike lane 10-foot travel lane

10:45 ↗ and then on seven an additional eight

10:47 ↗ foot wide parking strip

10:52 ↗ the through block connection is proposed

10:55 ↗ to

10:56 ↗ go from newport to 7

11:00 ↗ and it will also be

11:02 ↗ going to the north on the site to

11:05 ↗ service units 25-28

11:10 ↗ it's going to be a 20-foot

11:13 ↗ block passage with a 10 foot path and 5

11:16 ↗ feet of landscaping and amenity space on

11:19 ↗ both sides

11:22 ↗ the project is required to meet the tree

11:24 ↗ preservation standards outlined in

11:26 ↗ central issaquah plan

11:28 ↗ the minimum tree density is four

11:31 ↗ significant trees per five thousand

11:33 ↗ square feet of developed developable

11:35 ↗ area

11:36 ↗ the applicant is proposing a developable

11:39 ↗ area of approximately 56 000 square feet

11:44 ↗ so you can see that that will equate to

11:47 ↗ 45 trees to meet the minimum density

11:50 ↗ tree retention is going to be 25

11:53 ↗ of the total caliper of all significant

11:55 ↗ trees

11:56 ↗ and according to the information that

11:58 ↗ the developer has provided at this stage

12:01 ↗ it looks like approximately 45 inches of

12:04 ↗ existing caliper

12:06 ↗ shall be remained

12:08 ↗ retained and that is able to be

12:11 ↗ subtracted from the total minimum

12:13 ↗ density so if there is

12:15 ↗ two trees on site that

12:18 ↗ equal 45

12:20 ↗ inches cal per total

12:22 ↗ then that those two will be subtracted

12:24 ↗ from the 45 and the developer will be

12:27 ↗ required to plant 43.

12:31 ↗ to stay informed on this project please

12:33 ↗ contact me directly via email or

12:36 ↗ my phone number which is listed on the

12:37 ↗ screen here

12:39 ↗ and to give you just a little bit of a

12:40 ↗ heads up the image at the top is what we

12:43 ↗ have seen

12:45 ↗ the proposal

12:47 ↗ planning to move forward with

12:52 ↗ yep

12:54 ↗ we'll now transition to

12:57 ↗ the presentation by

12:59 ↗ the applicant

13:02 ↗ thank you miss keaton so now we'll

13:03 ↗ proceed with the applicant's

13:04 ↗ presentation i believe by their

13:06 ↗ architect alex klossy am i mangling your

13:10 ↗ name i'm afraid

13:12 ↗ okay close good

13:14 ↗ and he'll provide information about his

13:16 ↗ team and the project during his

13:17 ↗ presentation

13:33 ↗ testing okay

13:36 ↗ uh hello my name is alex klossie uh i'm

13:39 ↗ an architect with millbrand architects

13:42 ↗ and i'm working with

13:44 ↗ blue friends development team on this

13:45 ↗ proposal i want to thank

13:47 ↗ all of you guys for coming out tonight

13:50 ↗ to um

13:51 ↗ to

13:53 ↗ hear about our project and we look

13:55 ↗ forward to

13:56 ↗ kind of giving you a brief overview of

13:58 ↗ it and and giving you guys a chance to

14:01 ↗ see what we're proposing and and give

14:03 ↗ your input i want to thank the chair and

14:04 ↗ the development commission um for taking

14:07 ↗ the time to to hear our proposal as well

14:09 ↗ and

14:10 ↗ we we look forward to

14:12 ↗ working with you guys to develop

14:14 ↗ something that the city and the

14:16 ↗ applicant team are both happy with and

14:18 ↗ proud to move forward with

14:20 ↗ um

14:21 ↗ so the the name of the project right now

14:23 ↗ is towns on seventh and we're proposing

14:26 ↗ to build

14:27 ↗ for sale townhomes um how if you want to

14:30 ↗ flip to the next slide

14:36 ↗ i want to take a minute to introduce our

14:39 ↗ team on the applicant side as i said i

14:42 ↗ am alex i'm with the arc on the

14:45 ↗ architecture side i'm here tonight with

14:47 ↗ us from blueprint development who's the

14:48 ↗ developer we also have michelle brandley

14:51 ↗ and george john

14:53 ↗ um and then with core design who is

14:55 ↗ going to be handling the landscape

14:57 ↗ architecture and the civil engineering

14:59 ↗ holly hebron

15:02 ↗ and then we have also brought on board

15:06 ↗ favreau green forest who is a

15:08 ↗ consulting arborist at this point in the

15:10 ↗ process he's been working with us on the

15:12 ↗ tree preservation of the existing trees

15:14 ↗ on site

15:15 ↗ and then we have a traffic engineer on

15:17 ↗ board 10w

15:19 ↗ and

15:20 ↗ mike crimmons they're not in attendance

15:21 ↗ tonight but they have been part of the

15:23 ↗ the team at this point and of course

15:26 ↗ there'll be other consultants that come

15:28 ↗ on board as

15:29 ↗ the project moves forward

15:32 ↗ so i apologize for some of

15:36 ↗ some redundant information in relation

15:38 ↗ to

15:39 ↗ the project in sight that holly may have

15:41 ↗ just went over

15:42 ↗ but just to kind of start at a high

15:44 ↗ level

15:46 ↗ as holly had mentioned the site is

15:47 ↗ located at the intersection of newport

15:50 ↗ way

15:51 ↗ and holly street and then also bounded

15:53 ↗ on the eastern side by 7th

15:56 ↗ and the northern property line kind of

15:59 ↗ jogs

16:00 ↗ along the the bounding edge of those

16:03 ↗ parcels and is

16:05 ↗ bounded to the north by some residential

16:07 ↗ neighborhoods and then

16:09 ↗ also the the storage facility that is

16:12 ↗ along newport way

16:13 ↗ across holly street to

16:15 ↗ the south of the site is an elementary

16:18 ↗ school

16:20 ↗ so

16:21 ↗ as is shown on this slide right here you

16:23 ↗ can see

16:24 ↗ the with the improvements that will be

16:26 ↗ proposed as part of this project there

16:28 ↗ is a

16:29 ↗ a safe walk trail to the elementary

16:32 ↗ school from the development

16:34 ↗ um

16:35 ↗ the

16:36 ↗ the project

16:38 ↗ scope consists of six parcels which are

16:41 ↗ listed there on the screen

16:43 ↗ uh those parcels are currently zoned uh

16:45 ↗ m-u-r or multiple or sorry mixed-use

16:48 ↗ residential

16:50 ↗ the stated intent of that zone within

16:54 ↗ the central issaquah design standards is

16:57 ↗ to provide

16:59 ↗ low to medium density housing that

17:02 ↗ provides a transition from

17:04 ↗ the more dense urban core

17:06 ↗ to the the less dense surrounding

17:08 ↗ neighborhoods so our proposal is

17:11 ↗ seeking to fulfill that requirement by

17:14 ↗ providing

17:15 ↗ some high quality

17:17 ↗ medium density townhomes that

17:20 ↗ that

17:22 ↗ blend in with the surrounding context of

17:24 ↗ the this single family neighborhood

17:26 ↗ while providing

17:27 ↗ a bit more housing density

17:29 ↗ in the region and in the area

17:33 ↗ the

17:34 ↗ site square footage

17:35 ↗ is approximately the site area is

17:38 ↗ approximately 1.3 acres there will be a

17:40 ↗ few dedications

17:42 ↗ to right-of-way as part of the proposal

17:45 ↗ so the net developable area will fall

17:49 ↗ somewhere just under 1.3 acres once

17:52 ↗ those dedications are made

17:54 ↗ and the maximum density

17:57 ↗ or the the maximum far which is the

18:00 ↗ governing density for the site is 2.0

18:03 ↗ and you can see that our proposal

18:05 ↗ falls at

18:07 ↗ 0.93 right now so we're

18:10 ↗ well under the maximum density allowed

18:12 ↗ on site

18:16 ↗ if you want to flip to the next slide

18:18 ↗ thank you

18:20 ↗ so just a brief overview of more of the

18:22 ↗ details of the project specifically

18:25 ↗ and this image up here on the screen is

18:27 ↗ the current proposed site plan for the

18:30 ↗ project

18:31 ↗ as holly had mentioned it consists of 29

18:34 ↗ townhome units

18:36 ↗ in

18:37 ↗ what is actually six buildings so i

18:39 ↗ apologize holly

18:41 ↗ i did not catch that in your

18:42 ↗ presentation

18:45 ↗ and

18:46 ↗ interwoven amongst those buildings

18:49 ↗ will be the through black passage as was

18:51 ↗ mentioned

18:52 ↗ in other public community green spaces

18:55 ↗ as well as the internal drive access for

18:58 ↗ the site which will provide access to

19:00 ↗ all of the unit garages which contain

19:03 ↗ all the required parking for the units

19:07 ↗ and then

19:08 ↗ along the frontages as has been

19:10 ↗ discussed um there will be the the

19:12 ↗ proposed french improvements in

19:14 ↗ alignment with the city public works

19:16 ↗ requirements

19:18 ↗ along 7th avenue

19:20 ↗ uh holly street and newport way

19:25 ↗ at the very beginning of this process

19:28 ↗ we as applicant team sent

19:31 ↗ a consultant out to observe the site for

19:33 ↗ critical areas it was determined that

19:35 ↗ there were none on site

19:37 ↗ and that was in alignment with what the

19:40 ↗ city has mapped for the site as well

19:43 ↗ there are several existing significant

19:45 ↗ trees on site so you can see on the site

19:47 ↗ plan here

19:48 ↗ the

19:49 ↗ two trees that are a darker green color

19:52 ↗ towards the north of the property are

19:54 ↗ what we are currently proposing to meet

19:56 ↗ the retention requirements

19:58 ↗ in addition to that there are several

20:00 ↗ trees on the properties directly to the

20:02 ↗ north of ours

20:04 ↗ that will need to be protected through

20:06 ↗ the process as well so there

20:07 ↗ there's only two on our site but there's

20:09 ↗ quite a few trees that are being

20:11 ↗ protected along that northern property

20:12 ↗ line

20:14 ↗ oh if you want to flip to the next one

20:16 ↗ that would be great

20:21 ↗ so for the site improvement

20:24 ↗ as was mentioned there is an ongoing

20:28 ↗ project within public works

20:30 ↗ to implement a roundabout at the

20:32 ↗ intersection of newport and holly street

20:35 ↗ um

20:37 ↗ the

20:38 ↗ this has

20:39 ↗ been something that our applicant team

20:40 ↗ has been aware of from the very

20:42 ↗ beginning and we have been working

20:44 ↗ with uh the planning department and with

20:46 ↗ public works to

20:49 ↗ site plan our site in a manner that

20:53 ↗ is congruous with the proposed plans for

20:55 ↗ that

20:56 ↗ the roundabout right now is still in the

20:58 ↗ design stage so things are still a

21:00 ↗ little bit fluid and the roundabout

21:03 ↗ project itself would not be included in

21:05 ↗ the scope of of this proposal but the

21:08 ↗ intent is to design a site that allows

21:10 ↗ for that project to proceed

21:13 ↗ as planned and provide the flexibility

21:15 ↗ and the in the land dedication for them

21:17 ↗ to be able to complete for the city to

21:18 ↗ be able to complete that

21:20 ↗ as that project moves forward

21:22 ↗ um the holly street much of the frontage

21:25 ↗ of holly street is

21:27 ↗ going to be

21:29 ↗ to some extent tied up with that

21:31 ↗ roundabout improvement as well

21:34 ↗ how if you could flip back to the

21:36 ↗ previous slide really quick

21:38 ↗ that would be helpful

21:42 ↗ so here on this image on the left side

21:44 ↗ of the screen you can actually see

21:47 ↗ the plans that were provided to us by

21:49 ↗ transportation for the proposed

21:51 ↗ roundabout

21:52 ↗ that we've kind of ghosted in behind our

21:54 ↗ site plan to show

21:56 ↗ at least at this stage what the proposal

21:59 ↗ is and how it would um relate to the

22:02 ↗ site plan that we currently have

22:04 ↗ so

22:05 ↗ moving forward how you can go back to

22:07 ↗ the next slide thank you i appreciate it

22:09 ↗ moving forward that will continue to be

22:11 ↗ an ongoing discussion with the city

22:14 ↗ it's something that has been talked

22:16 ↗ about through the pre-op process and

22:17 ↗ leading up to this meeting

22:19 ↗ and

22:20 ↗ what

22:21 ↗ what improvements occur along holly

22:24 ↗ street in newport way are something that

22:26 ↗ we're still trying to

22:28 ↗ understand and seek guidance from on the

22:30 ↗ city in relation to the roundabout

22:32 ↗ project

22:33 ↗ since that will at the end of the day be

22:36 ↗ what comes in and is installed there but

22:38 ↗ may be lagging behind this proposal

22:43 ↗ along 7th avenue as was mentioned

22:46 ↗ there'll be

22:47 ↗ the improvements to the drive lanes

22:50 ↗ on-street parallel parking provided as

22:52 ↗ well as the landscape landscape strip

22:55 ↗ and sidewalk

22:57 ↗ and then

22:59 ↗ there obviously will be utility and

23:01 ↗ infrastructure improvements as is

23:03 ↗ required

23:04 ↗ by the city and public works to support

23:06 ↗ this added density and development

23:10 ↗ and uh holly on our team has been taking

23:13 ↗ point and running all that stuff so if

23:16 ↗ if you have further questions about that

23:18 ↗ she's happy to to give you some more

23:20 ↗ answers there

23:22 ↗ and then finally going back to the tree

23:24 ↗ retention the site plan here you can see

23:27 ↗ along the that northern property line at

23:30 ↗ the top

23:31 ↗ that highlights both the on-site and

23:33 ↗ off-site trees that are proposed to be

23:35 ↗ retained as well as uh the just the

23:38 ↗ overall landscape plan showing um the

23:40 ↗ various trees and plantings that are

23:42 ↗ intended to meet the um

23:45 ↗ canopy

23:46 ↗ or the canopy percentage for the site

23:56 ↗ thank you

23:57 ↗ so i just wanted to take a little bit of

23:58 ↗ time here to talk

24:00 ↗ more in depth about the through block

24:02 ↗ passage

24:03 ↗ and community spaces on the site in

24:05 ↗ response to the central squad district

24:07 ↗ standards

24:10 ↗ the

24:11 ↗ the district standards require

24:15 ↗ or encourage

24:17 ↗ us to provide

24:18 ↗ connection between

24:21 ↗ the major the existing right-of-ways in

24:23 ↗ a block in the form of a through block

24:25 ↗ passage and so our site plan has sought

24:28 ↗ to

24:30 ↗ provide that as a amenity that would be

24:33 ↗ not just for the residents of the site

24:34 ↗ but for the public at large

24:37 ↗ it runs between newport way on the

24:39 ↗ western edge and 7th avenue or 7th on

24:42 ↗ the eastern side

24:44 ↗ and in the central location of the site

24:47 ↗ we're proposed to put

24:49 ↗ a community gathering area um which is

24:52 ↗ is schematically represented by

24:55 ↗ that image on the top of the screen with

24:57 ↗ some barbecues and picnic facilities a

24:59 ↗ place where residents can come together

25:02 ↗ and interact with each other

25:05 ↗ as well as an open lawn area just a

25:08 ↗ place to provide gathering and

25:11 ↗ a node along the three block passage to

25:14 ↗ enliven that space

25:16 ↗ in addition the three block passes

25:18 ↗ extends to the north

25:20 ↗ in alignment with the

25:22 ↗ uh issaquah district standards for

25:26 ↗ ensuring that front doors of units the

25:29 ↗ main unit entries open onto a primary

25:31 ↗ through block passage so

25:33 ↗ the

25:34 ↗ four units that are to the north

25:37 ↗ in building five on the site plan

25:40 ↗ all front a through block passage which

25:42 ↗ gives them a 20 plus foot separation

25:45 ↗ from that property line

25:50 ↗ holly if you want to go ahead and flip

25:52 ↗ to the next one

25:56 ↗ so this this slide here is talking more

25:59 ↗ directly about the vertical architecture

26:01 ↗ the townhome architecture itself

26:04 ↗ and that will be

26:05 ↗ in response to the urban architecture

26:07 ↗ and urban design manual that is the

26:10 ↗ guiding basis for

26:11 ↗ our thought process on the design

26:14 ↗ holly laid out

26:16 ↗ very succinctly in her slides the

26:18 ↗ requirements

26:20 ↗ for those

26:21 ↗ and you can see this image that is up

26:23 ↗ here to the left

26:24 ↗ is our proposal for

26:26 ↗ a typical townhome building on site

26:30 ↗ we are proposing

26:32 ↗ in alignment with the

26:34 ↗ arts and crafts style

26:35 ↗ steeply pitched roofs and gable forms

26:38 ↗ with intersecting ridges

26:40 ↗ you can see some variations in height

26:43 ↗ along the roof line there

26:45 ↗ and as well

26:47 ↗ with this being a three-story townhome

26:48 ↗ building but some of the units having a

26:50 ↗ habitable attic space

26:52 ↗ a very variation along the e line of the

26:54 ↗ building that helps break up the massing

26:58 ↗ and and

27:00 ↗ kind of keep things at more of a human

27:02 ↗ scale

27:04 ↗ for materials we're proposing

27:07 ↗ a brick material

27:10 ↗ which provides a strong base along

27:13 ↗ the bottom of the building as well as

27:15 ↗ elevating that up up to three stories in

27:18 ↗ some locations as a

27:21 ↗ focal point

27:22 ↗ along the facade

27:24 ↗ and then the remainder of the facade

27:26 ↗ would be clad

27:28 ↗ in simulated wood

27:29 ↗ [Music]

27:30 ↗ that is painted

27:33 ↗ for the window treatments um in

27:35 ↗ alignment with the district standards

27:37 ↗ we're proposing single hung windows and

27:39 ↗ groupings of one two or three

27:42 ↗ um simple rectangular forms with just

27:45 ↗ simple trim

27:46 ↗ or in the case of

27:48 ↗ them being located within the brick

27:50 ↗ facade highlighted by

27:53 ↗ or more ornate brickwork

27:56 ↗ full light glass entry doors and for the

27:58 ↗ color scheme

28:01 ↗ in line with

28:02 ↗ earth tone colors whites

28:04 ↗ grays dark grays

28:06 ↗ a dark asphalt shingle roof

28:09 ↗ uh

28:13 ↗ if you want to go ahead and flip to the

28:14 ↗ next slide

28:17 ↗ so

28:18 ↗ again i want to thank both the

28:20 ↗ commission and the community residents

28:22 ↗ for taking their time to come out and

28:24 ↗ hear our presentation tonight

28:26 ↗ moving forward

28:28 ↗ we are looking to make the site

28:30 ↗ development permits the middle of sdp

28:32 ↗ submittal

28:33 ↗ and that is reviewed by city staff

28:36 ↗ um and then

28:38 ↗ there is an amount of back and forth

28:40 ↗ with them to

28:42 ↗ come to agreement on a proposal that

28:44 ↗ satisfies all city regulations

28:46 ↗ that would go back before this

28:47 ↗ development commission for public

28:50 ↗ hearing and approval at the end of that

28:52 ↗ process

28:53 ↗ and then moving forward from there we'd

28:55 ↗ have the opportunity to submit for our

28:56 ↗ building permits

28:58 ↗ thank you again for taking the time to

29:00 ↗ see our proposal please let us know if

29:02 ↗ you have any questions

29:04 ↗ and we look forward to working with the

29:06 ↗ community of this club to provide a high

29:07 ↗ quality project thank you

29:11 ↗ thank you mr klossie so now i'm going to

29:13 ↗ open the floor for public questions and

29:15 ↗ comments

29:16 ↗ for those making comments please direct

29:18 ↗ your comments and questions to the

29:20 ↗ applicant the staff is here to answer

29:22 ↗ any questions you have about the review

29:24 ↗ and permitting process but i ask that

29:26 ↗ all questions related to the site and

29:28 ↗ design be directed to the applicant and

29:31 ↗ its design team as a reminder when it's

29:34 ↗ turned to speak state your name each

29:36 ↗ time before speaking speak clearly and

29:38 ↗ limit your comments to five minutes

29:41 ↗ after a comment or question has been

29:42 ↗ stated the applicant or someone from the

29:45 ↗ design team will provide a response

29:48 ↗ mr patch was anyone signed up for

29:50 ↗ comments on this topic

29:52 ↗ yes sir we have john

29:54 ↗ falstrom signed up first

30:02 ↗ good evening

30:04 ↗ my name is john falstrom and i live at

30:06 ↗ 885 7th avenue northwest

30:09 ↗ first let me say that i'm not

30:11 ↗ anti-growth

30:12 ↗ and i don't want to come across as the

30:14 ↗ old curmudgeon on the block

30:17 ↗ but i want what happens in my town and

30:20 ↗ i've lived here since 1965

30:22 ↗ to make sense i have several concerns

30:25 ↗ about the proposed towns on seventh

30:28 ↗ development

30:29 ↗ density traffic parking and the

30:32 ↗ environmental impacts are my major

30:35 ↗ concerns first on the issue of density

30:38 ↗ and mind you i'll clarify this by saying

30:40 ↗ that

30:41 ↗ this is what i was able to get off the

30:43 ↗ city's website so

30:45 ↗ if it's in error i

30:47 ↗ am open to being corrected

30:49 ↗ currently that the property stated for

30:51 ↗ development is has four single family

30:53 ↗ residences on it

30:55 ↗ unoccupied uh for the most part

30:58 ↗ sorry

30:59 ↗ um

31:00 ↗ the proposed project is stated to have

31:02 ↗ 29 multi-family units that's a 725

31:05 ↗ percent increase

31:08 ↗ the current zoning is mixed use

31:09 ↗ residential acknowledged by the

31:12 ↗ proponent

31:14 ↗ and a density factor

31:16 ↗ and and and mixed-use residential what i

31:19 ↗ was able to determine 14.52

31:21 ↗ dwelling units per acre

31:24 ↗ um

31:25 ↗ using that factor the maximum number of

31:27 ↗ units should be just under 19 at 18.87

31:31 ↗ uh 29 units represent more than a 50

31:34 ↗ percent increase in what i was able to

31:36 ↗ determine by the city standards

31:39 ↗ allowable under the current zoning

31:42 ↗ my next issue

31:43 ↗ is

31:44 ↗ and do you want me to stop and answer

31:46 ↗ that question or continue on with this

31:48 ↗ i'll

31:49 ↗ defer to guidance from the

31:52 ↗ commission what would you prefer mr

31:53 ↗ closing

31:54 ↗ would you like to respond to those two

31:56 ↗ first sure

31:58 ↗ um so appreciate

32:00 ↗ uh your questions and your concerns

32:03 ↗ um from a density standpoint uh one

32:06 ↗ thing that i did forget to mention is

32:08 ↗ the existing the current existing use of

32:10 ↗ the site so yes it is

32:12 ↗ um either vacant land or currently

32:14 ↗ single-family homes

32:15 ↗ um

32:16 ↗ as holly keaton had mentioned in her

32:19 ↗ presentation

32:20 ↗ uh the with the site being zoned for the

32:22 ↗ mur use

32:24 ↗ um and

32:26 ↗ being

32:27 ↗ the comprehensive plan designation for

32:29 ↗ that parcel being uh multi-family use

32:32 ↗ going forward

32:34 ↗ we believe that the city's intent for

32:36 ↗ those parcels is to bring more density

32:38 ↗ to the to

32:40 ↗ the those sites

32:42 ↗ um

32:43 ↗ and so basically what we have put

32:46 ↗ forward is a proposal that is in

32:48 ↗ alignment with what we believe the

32:50 ↗ city's goals to be as well as with the

32:52 ↗ the current zoning of the site

32:55 ↗ so the

32:56 ↗ there's a couple different ways for

32:58 ↗ density to be measured it can be units

33:00 ↗ per acre or this far mechanism so far is

33:04 ↗ the floor area ratio

33:06 ↗ and

33:08 ↗ out of the central island design

33:10 ↗ standards the far is what governs the

33:13 ↗ density on the site in this case

33:16 ↗ so at a 2.0 far we'd be allowed

33:20 ↗ essentially to build twice whatever the

33:22 ↗ site area is

33:24 ↗ our proposal is currently proposing 0.93

33:27 ↗ so we're falling well below that

33:29 ↗ threshold

33:31 ↗ all right i'll have to review that and

33:33 ↗ see how that

33:34 ↗ that that that provides quite a quite a

33:36 ↗ difference in what's published at 14 and

33:39 ↗ a half dwelling units per acre so

33:42 ↗ my next issue is the added traffic

33:43 ↗ impacts the development will have on 7th

33:45 ↗ avenue as that's

33:47 ↗ my frontage

33:49 ↗ 7th avenue currently has is less than a

33:52 ↗ normal legal street width now

33:56 ↗ and at and it's 30 feet i've measured it

33:59 ↗ several times

34:00 ↗ with parking allowed on each side

34:03 ↗ at times reducing the the open traffic

34:06 ↗ flow to

34:08 ↗ essentially one lane uh at a time

34:11 ↗ and that's less than and being being

34:13 ↗ generous with uh carwith that saying

34:16 ↗ seven feet

34:18 ↗ that's less than the 20 feet required by

34:20 ↗ fire code

34:22 ↗ and and that's the entire street is

34:23 ↗ currently that way street was never

34:26 ↗ intended to serve the current traffic

34:28 ↗ volume

34:29 ↗ and the traffic volume is on file with

34:31 ↗ the city a study done

34:33 ↗ i believe about three years ago i have a

34:35 ↗ copy of that

34:36 ↗ it's more today by quite a bit

34:39 ↗ as to parking the residents on 7th

34:42 ↗ avenue already see the impacts of other

34:45 ↗ nearby developments and businesses many

34:48 ↗ times residents of the atlas and vale

34:50 ↗ apartments are forced to park south of

34:52 ↗ juniper on 7th as there are no spots

34:54 ↗ available near their buildings now

34:56 ↗ that's not an impact

34:58 ↗ it's not directly from your project

35:00 ↗ because it isn't there yet

35:02 ↗ add to that we absorb overflow parking

35:05 ↗ from aegis and occasionally the juniper

35:07 ↗ street professional building

35:10 ↗ and in looking

35:11 ↗ at the proposed

35:13 ↗ drawings of the towns on seventh project

35:15 ↗ it appears there are only four possible

35:18 ↗ spaces on the exterior

35:20 ↗ side of the garages where

35:23 ↗ where visitors might be able to park

35:26 ↗ with 29

35:28 ↗ units i think that there's going to be

35:30 ↗ plenty of visitors in there

35:32 ↗ uh where will they park

35:34 ↗ um

35:36 ↗ and i i appreciate the acknowledgement

35:38 ↗ of of providing for 58

35:42 ↗ parking spaces underneath the the

35:44 ↗ buildings as

35:45 ↗ that's the reality at today's price

35:47 ↗ point

35:48 ↗ um

35:52 ↗ the and i've heard you say that the the

35:54 ↗ driveway or the bump out that's shown on

35:57 ↗ the plan that was circulated

36:01 ↗ on 7th avenue will provide some

36:03 ↗ on-street parallel parking

36:05 ↗ and i don't think that's going to be

36:07 ↗ adequate but

36:09 ↗ and then the

36:11 ↗ other parking issue

36:13 ↗ is

36:14 ↗ um the city and i guess

36:17 ↗ i'm almost done the city is going to

36:19 ↗ need to acknowledge

36:22 ↗ how construction traffic is managed

36:23 ↗ during this project because there's no

36:26 ↗ unless the school district agrees to

36:28 ↗ absorb the

36:31 ↗ the project that's

36:33 ↗ anyway

36:34 ↗ regarding the pedestrian strap traffic

36:36 ↗ and the improvements that you do they're

36:38 ↗ great

36:39 ↗ they are a road to nowhere on 7th avenue

36:42 ↗ there is no transition from that project

36:46 ↗ to the major sidewalk improvements north

36:48 ↗ of

36:49 ↗ juniper on 7th

36:51 ↗ other than in front through my front

36:53 ↗ yard and so

36:55 ↗ i'd like to have

36:56 ↗ some discussion with somebody in the

36:58 ↗ planning department at some time to try

37:00 ↗ to figure out how that's going to work

37:02 ↗ because it's going to create

37:03 ↗ a very large number of pedestrian

37:06 ↗ walkways going to safeway any other

37:08 ↗ stores

37:09 ↗ and

37:10 ↗ they're just going to be on the street

37:11 ↗ which is a safety issue

37:14 ↗ i've got other things but that sums it

37:17 ↗ up for now and i appreciate the

37:19 ↗ opportunity to be able to bring this

37:20 ↗ forward

37:23 ↗ thanks mr clausie did you have any

37:24 ↗ response to the rest of that input

37:27 ↗ sure so again thank you um these are all

37:31 ↗ great points and concerns to raise

37:34 ↗ particularly for all of you who live in

37:36 ↗ the area who are going to see you know

37:37 ↗ the most direct impacts of this um i'll

37:40 ↗ try and kind of go through one by one

37:44 ↗ in relation to the streets and

37:47 ↗ parking and pedestrian to some extent

37:49 ↗ as was mentioned the 7th avenue

37:52 ↗ is currently unclassified in the

37:55 ↗ transportation plan

37:57 ↗ but that would be that's part of the

37:59 ↗ whole development process is to work out

38:00 ↗ a classification for that street

38:03 ↗ in relation to the street with itself we

38:05 ↗ would be providing 20 feet of pavement

38:08 ↗ to 10-foot travel lanes on each side and

38:10 ↗ then the parking would be outside of

38:12 ↗ that

38:14 ↗ so

38:14 ↗ the street and that's all really

38:17 ↗ dictated by public works and city

38:19 ↗ standards so

38:21 ↗ um

38:22 ↗ they have put you know much time and

38:25 ↗ resource into developing their

38:26 ↗ transportation plan and as part of our

38:29 ↗ project we would be required to make

38:30 ↗ those improvements on our side of the

38:33 ↗ site and in front of our site

38:35 ↗ to your point about what happens further

38:37 ↗ down the street

38:39 ↗ that would be that would fall outside of

38:40 ↗ the scope of this project and would be

38:42 ↗ something that's more on a

38:45 ↗ planning or transportation basis with

38:47 ↗ the city in terms of what their

38:48 ↗ long-term goals are for for that street

38:53 ↗ for in relation to parking

38:55 ↗ i will admit that this is always a

38:57 ↗ concern that comes up amongst the

39:00 ↗ community cars are big they take up a

39:02 ↗ lot of room

39:03 ↗ we have made a concerted effort to

39:05 ↗ provide two stalls for every unit in a

39:07 ↗ garage

39:09 ↗ the zoning

39:10 ↗ allows for less than that but we

39:13 ↗ as the

39:14 ↗ development team both from a market

39:16 ↗ value and just from a practicality

39:18 ↗ standpoint really feel that families

39:20 ↗ still are gonna have two cars and

39:22 ↗ they're gonna need a place to park those

39:23 ↗ cars um in addition you mentioned we do

39:26 ↗ have some open stalls on the site as

39:28 ↗ well to provide for guest parking

39:31 ↗ that's not necessarily a requirement by

39:33 ↗ the zoning code but it is something that

39:35 ↗ we've tried to provide as both an

39:37 ↗ amenity to try and keep cars off the

39:39 ↗ street as much as possible

39:44 ↗ thanks do we have another speaker signed

39:45 ↗ up to speak

39:47 ↗ yes chair we have john trager signed up

39:49 ↗ next

39:56 ↗ good evening my name is john trager i

39:58 ↗ live at 710 7th avenue northwest which

40:01 ↗ is directly across the street from the

40:03 ↗ proposed project

40:06 ↗ i am also a

40:07 ↗ current board member of the bridgewater

40:10 ↗ place condominium homeowners association

40:13 ↗ bridgewater's places all the

40:15 ↗ duplexes across the street

40:19 ↗ i've also served on the squad

40:20 ↗ development commission and have reviewed

40:22 ↗ the documents and i have some comments

40:24 ↗ here that have also been reviewed with

40:26 ↗ the other board members

40:28 ↗ so the first area is the building site

40:30 ↗ design

40:32 ↗ the massing scale materials and colors

40:34 ↗ all seem in context with the

40:36 ↗ neighborhood and the centrosqua

40:39 ↗ general zoning or our style so we

40:42 ↗ appreciate that

40:45 ↗ the lighting consideration needs to be

40:47 ↗ sensitive to the second floor bedrooms

40:49 ↗ and the condo streets across the street

40:52 ↗ so

40:53 ↗ those bedrooms face out and if they have

40:56 ↗ bright lights shining in probably make

40:57 ↗ it kind of hard to sleep for folks

41:01 ↗ traffic movement

41:03 ↗ speeds on 7th avenue northwest have been

41:05 ↗ high for years

41:06 ↗ despite community members complaining to

41:09 ↗ the city council in public works we've

41:11 ↗ been asking for a speed hump or some

41:12 ↗ means

41:14 ↗ to bring the speeds down when they did a

41:15 ↗ speed measurement there they were

41:17 ↗ hitting like 50 miles an hour

41:19 ↗ because

41:20 ↗ on the

41:22 ↗ west side of the street

41:24 ↗ there's no curb gutter sidewalk people

41:26 ↗ generally don't park there there's more

41:27 ↗ of a ditch

41:28 ↗ so the street looks physically wide and

41:31 ↗ people just hit the metal

41:33 ↗ and go fast down the street

41:35 ↗ and part of it is the success of the

41:38 ↗ apartment buildings that were built

41:39 ↗ further up on seventh

41:42 ↗ and the success of the

41:44 ↗ safeway complex and town center over

41:47 ↗ there a lot of traffic heading

41:49 ↗ southbound

41:50 ↗ on the newport

41:51 ↗ tends to come all the way down and then

41:53 ↗ turn on

41:55 ↗ holly street so something you want to

41:57 ↗ consider is

41:59 ↗ how that will work with two roundabouts

42:02 ↗ because people will want to do two

42:04 ↗ roundabouts they'll want to go all the

42:06 ↗ way down to hawley take one round about

42:08 ↗ to get a new port to go south because

42:10 ↗ that seems to be where most the flow

42:11 ↗ goes

42:12 ↗ that we see coming every day

42:16 ↗ um

42:18 ↗ and so

42:19 ↗ we'd like to have the

42:21 ↗ curb gutter and sidewalk

42:23 ↗ if possible with the entire length of

42:25 ↗ the street

42:26 ↗ to try to narrow it and slow it down so

42:28 ↗ if you look at the block north there on

42:30 ↗ 7th north of juniper

42:33 ↗ they actually travel slower because it's

42:35 ↗ a very narrow street with parking on

42:36 ↗ both sides

42:38 ↗ and so we'd like to have something

42:39 ↗ similar if we can't get a speed hump at

42:41 ↗ least something has the same effect on

42:43 ↗ the speeds of the traffic

42:45 ↗ because all the houses on our side back

42:48 ↗ out onto that street so it's already

42:51 ↗ interesting enough

42:52 ↗ and one last consideration there in

42:54 ↗ traffic movement is with a single

42:56 ↗ driveway in and out of the proposed

42:58 ↗ project

42:59 ↗ strictly across from my

43:01 ↗ my driveway so i'm backing out and

43:03 ↗ having cars turning motion

43:05 ↗ and then cars coming down the street

43:06 ↗ it's going to be interesting

43:08 ↗ so i don't know if that one driveway is

43:10 ↗ going to work

43:12 ↗ perfectly well or safely so something to

43:14 ↗ consider there

43:18 ↗ there's no utility plan obviously it's a

43:20 ↗ little bit early

43:21 ↗ but a consideration so there's an

43:23 ↗ existing pole on the east side of 7000

43:25 ↗ northwest that services the

43:28 ↗ current buildings on the property

43:30 ↗ and it also services a couple of our

43:32 ↗ units because it was

43:34 ↗ came down the street to a pole then it

43:36 ↗ got underground from that location

43:39 ↗ so we'd like to see that all of it get

43:41 ↗ underground correctly

43:43 ↗ when you have to bring in undergrounding

43:45 ↗ for your utilities that you would

43:46 ↗ include ours and get rid of that pole

43:48 ↗ together bring it all underground like

43:49 ↗ it should have been done originally

43:52 ↗ um another question in that area is will

43:55 ↗ there be gas lines or is this going to

43:57 ↗ be an all-electric facility

44:00 ↗ um

44:01 ↗ and then another related question is

44:03 ↗ what is the power service will there be

44:05 ↗ power sufficient power for electric car

44:07 ↗ charging in these units

44:11 ↗ construction plans

44:14 ↗ what is the construction vehicle flow

44:16 ↗ plan there's a school across hawley that

44:19 ↗ a significant bus and car traffic during

44:21 ↗ the school year

44:22 ↗ in the mornings and afternoons

44:25 ↗ and there's insufficient pace space on

44:27 ↗ northeast 7th for truck turning radius

44:29 ↗ into the job site

44:32 ↗ so we propose that large vehicles such

44:34 ↗ as dump trucks flatbeds and concrete

44:36 ↗ trucks enter and exit from newport way

44:38 ↗ on a maybe a temporary work driveway

44:41 ↗ because it's it gets really busy there

44:43 ↗ during those times a day

44:46 ↗ also related to construction is where

44:48 ↗ will the employees park so

44:51 ↗ there's very limited parking as you've

44:53 ↗ already heard

44:55 ↗ so we propose that you secure off-site

44:57 ↗ parking for your construction staff

44:59 ↗ thank you

45:03 ↗ thank you

45:04 ↗ this is on right

45:06 ↗ yes

45:07 ↗ sorry i've been blasting all your

45:08 ↗ eardrums i didn't realize we could stand

45:10 ↗ back here and

45:11 ↗ i'll be good

45:12 ↗ um

45:13 ↗ so

45:15 ↗ again thank you for your comment

45:17 ↗ um

45:18 ↗ in relation to the the front is

45:21 ↗ improvements along 7th as i kind of

45:23 ↗ touched on earlier

45:24 ↗ the applicant team's responsibility is

45:27 ↗ the portion that's in front of their

45:28 ↗ site and we would

45:31 ↗ redevelop that in alignment with the

45:33 ↗ isoqua's plans for that street

45:36 ↗ um

45:36 ↗ the access point itself to the site for

45:39 ↗ the drive aisle the internal drive aisle

45:41 ↗ there's a couple constraints upon where

45:43 ↗ that can go one being that seventh is

45:46 ↗ the lowest classification of

45:48 ↗ right-of-way frontage that we have so

45:50 ↗ generally

45:51 ↗ that's where the access points to the

45:53 ↗ site are encouraged to be placed

45:55 ↗ and then also we want to keep that

45:56 ↗ removed from the intersection to the

45:59 ↗ greatest extent possible

46:01 ↗ just for safety from turning and kind of

46:04 ↗ conflicts around the intersection so

46:05 ↗ that

46:06 ↗ that was an intentional choice on our

46:08 ↗ end to locate it there based on some of

46:10 ↗ the you know the

46:13 ↗ practical safety concerns

46:15 ↗ um as well as separation requirements

46:18 ↗ and things of that nature that public

46:19 ↗ works has

46:21 ↗ in relation to the construction

46:23 ↗ and kind of the plan for managing all of

46:25 ↗ that

46:26 ↗ issaquah or any jurisdiction will have

46:29 ↗ in place um

46:31 ↗ requirements and that's part of the

46:33 ↗ permitting process in terms of

46:34 ↗ demonstrating how

46:36 ↗ the plan for going about construction

46:38 ↗ will be handled

46:40 ↗ um

46:41 ↗ and obviously impacts on surrounding

46:43 ↗ right-of-ways need to be coordinated as

46:45 ↗ part of that process in terms of

46:47 ↗ when things can be ripped up and when

46:49 ↗ things can be shut down to make those

46:51 ↗ improvements to the site and things of

46:52 ↗ that nature so all of that is is

46:54 ↗ governed in uh

46:56 ↗ in a process and reviewed by the city

46:58 ↗ and developed in in tandem with the city

47:00 ↗ to

47:01 ↗ hopefully take in to account you know

47:03 ↗ the surrounding community and the

47:04 ↗ impacts that it has on everyone

47:07 ↗ um

47:08 ↗ i believe you had a question in there

47:09 ↗ about uh whether there would be gas

47:12 ↗ coming on the site and then also the

47:14 ↗ electric

47:15 ↗ holley can confirm but i i don't believe

47:17 ↗ we're proposing any gas for this site at

47:20 ↗ this time

47:22 ↗ yeah

47:23 ↗ um and then in terms of the electric

47:25 ↗ utilities

47:26 ↗ um again that would be developed in

47:29 ↗ accordance with and with guidance from

47:31 ↗ public works in terms of what they're

47:32 ↗ looking to see in those frontage

47:33 ↗ improvements uh our understanding at

47:36 ↗ this time is that the power would be

47:38 ↗ underground along that frontage for the

47:40 ↗ entirety as part of the improvements

47:42 ↗ there

47:43 ↗ and then i believe you also had a

47:45 ↗ question

47:46 ↗ about the ev charging

47:48 ↗ so

47:49 ↗ that's

47:50 ↗ again also part of isco's code

47:53 ↗ and they have a requirement

47:55 ↗ and it's actually now been adopted as

47:56 ↗ part of the state code for

47:59 ↗ any type of residential development that

48:01 ↗ you have to provide a certain percentage

48:03 ↗ of electrical electric vehicle charging

48:06 ↗ stations as part of the development

48:09 ↗ i i believe does that cover

48:11 ↗ most everything that you had

48:24 ↗ lighting oh and that that was um just

48:27 ↗ sight lighting kind of the impacts upon

48:29 ↗ the site so um for external lighting on

48:32 ↗ the site

48:34 ↗ there will be a lighting plan developed

48:36 ↗ and that will be

48:37 ↗ with

48:39 ↗ you know industry best standards in

48:40 ↗ terms of

48:41 ↗ what is currently acceptable

48:44 ↗ lots of down lighting trying to minimize

48:46 ↗ impacts off the site and on the

48:48 ↗ environment

48:50 ↗ and then for the

48:51 ↗ in terms of lights internal to the

48:53 ↗ residences um you know these would these

48:55 ↗ units would all be provided with blinds

48:57 ↗ or

48:59 ↗ other

49:00 ↗ other devices for the you know the

49:02 ↗ resident's own use as well um to help

49:04 ↗ mitigate

49:06 ↗ lighting impacts outside of the unit

49:10 ↗ thanks next speaker on the list please

49:13 ↗ yesterday we have

49:15 ↗ james

49:18 ↗ how's everybody doing tonight thanks for

49:20 ↗ being here uh my name is james carr i'm

49:22 ↗ the neighbor to where you guys are going

49:23 ↗ to be the universal energy martial arts

49:24 ↗ school um first off you guys are going

49:27 ↗ to take my view

49:29 ↗ and that's it is what it is but uh it's

49:31 ↗ gonna be a nice view forever against

49:32 ↗ that corner lot there uh my big one is

49:34 ↗ so i mow the grass a lot uh right where

49:37 ↗ my sign is and there's about a four foot

49:38 ↗ drop so you guys when they start doing

49:41 ↗ the new the newport way and expanding

49:43 ↗ that out that's gonna have to flow you

49:46 ↗ guys gonna have significant drainage

49:47 ↗ because that whole area

49:49 ↗ the backside the whole thing on on that

49:52 ↗ property is underwater

49:54 ↗ at least a month out of the year so

49:56 ↗ there's got to be some serious drainage

49:58 ↗ put into that place because i don't want

50:00 ↗ it to come onto mine

50:01 ↗ and flood me out because as soon as that

50:03 ↗ lifts up you guys gonna have to raise up

50:04 ↗ i'm assuming is that correct

50:07 ↗ yeah so for drainage um holly has ran

50:10 ↗ point on all of this but

50:12 ↗ this this

50:14 ↗ soils on the site are not going to allow

50:15 ↗ for any sort of infiltration so we're

50:17 ↗ proposing a vault on site that would

50:19 ↗ handle all the on-site stormwater and

50:21 ↗ then i believe additional facilities

50:23 ↗ that would handle

50:24 ↗ the right-of-way improvements or things

50:26 ↗ that are off of our site

50:28 ↗ and so that would all be that's all to

50:30 ↗ the stormwater manual

50:32 ↗ um which is all you know very

50:33 ↗ specifically laid out in terms of the

50:35 ↗ requirements of that so that's how all

50:37 ↗ the on-site runoff and and that would

50:39 ↗ all be treated on-site internally before

50:41 ↗ it's disbursed sweet um when you guys

50:44 ↗ are building

50:45 ↗ there's tons of kids that are my place

50:46 ↗ plus also during the school year there's

50:48 ↗ tons of kids that are walking in and out

50:50 ↗ are you guys gonna fence that around

50:51 ↗ while you're doing building

50:54 ↗ yeah so it'd be a typical um

50:56 ↗ construction plan management plan um

50:59 ↗ with fencing and and kind of what i had

51:01 ↗ touched upon earlier that all is

51:02 ↗ developed

51:03 ↗ throughout the permitting process to

51:05 ↗ make sure that all of those scenarios

51:07 ↗ are you know forethought and addressed

51:09 ↗ ahead of time to try and minimize how

51:11 ↗ about afterwards will it be fenced

51:13 ↗ around or will be wide open so the

51:14 ↗ frontage all of the frontages would be

51:17 ↗ open um how about the connecting lots

51:19 ↗ like to the neighbors to to the to the

51:23 ↗ north yes the northwest yeah so

51:25 ↗ we would propose a form of privacy

51:27 ↗ fencing along the shared property lines

51:29 ↗ um the front the street front is

51:31 ↗ themselves um kind of in alignment with

51:33 ↗ that i was just maybe talking about that

51:34 ↗ yeah okay cool um

51:38 ↗ and so you're just gonna have one in in

51:40 ↗ egress ingress on the seventh correct so

51:42 ↗ not a newport okay and uh

51:53 ↗ she's going to take the rest um

51:56 ↗ effects of visibility hi my name is amy

51:58 ↗ carr and also

52:00 ↗ i have a fitness studio right next door

52:02 ↗ to the proposed

52:04 ↗ site

52:06 ↗ towns on 7th

52:07 ↗ and specifically the effects of

52:10 ↗ visibility for our business i know that

52:13 ↗ they're going to be

52:14 ↗ taking a portion of our business once

52:17 ↗ they do roundabouts and expand that road

52:21 ↗ but as far as the design

52:23 ↗ um our business is nestled kind of in

52:26 ↗ between the storage unit place as well

52:29 ↗ as

52:29 ↗ seven so we've got two very large

52:32 ↗ uh buildings on the side of us and then

52:34 ↗ we're kind of just stuck in between so

52:36 ↗ as far as visibility for us we're not

52:39 ↗ sure how that's going to look for people

52:42 ↗ to be able to see and know that that's

52:43 ↗ where our studio is

52:45 ↗ as far as entrance

52:47 ↗ as far as the

52:49 ↗ reality of the traffic on newport way i

52:52 ↗ know a lot of people discuss seventh and

52:55 ↗ newport way is

52:57 ↗ very has very high traffic and

53:00 ↗ specifically during certain times of the

53:02 ↗ day

53:03 ↗ and i know that john had mentioned

53:06 ↗ the um

53:07 ↗ the limit and the capacity of only being

53:10 ↗ able to put so many units on that and i

53:11 ↗ know that you guys have also talked

53:13 ↗ about that

53:14 ↗ but adding even more traffic to

53:17 ↗ the area when it's already congested is

53:20 ↗ going to cause

53:22 ↗ you know serious issues for neighbors

53:24 ↗ and for safety as far as for the

53:26 ↗ community

53:27 ↗ um

53:28 ↗ and so will there be traffic

53:32 ↗ control provided during the project

53:36 ↗ yeah so

53:37 ↗ um

53:38 ↗ something that i that i should have

53:39 ↗ mentioned earlier

53:41 ↗ on that first slide with our team we do

53:43 ↗ have the traffic engineer that's on

53:45 ↗ board and he kind of does the scoping

53:47 ↗ analysis of the site and what the

53:48 ↗ impacts of that are going to be

53:50 ↗ and then they would offer

53:52 ↗ recommendations for how to try and

53:54 ↗ mitigate those effects in the

53:55 ↗ surrounding areas and that you know

53:57 ↗ expands out from the site to a certain

53:59 ↗ extent not just directly adjacent to the

54:01 ↗ site in terms of how that's going to be

54:03 ↗ managed um and and that and then the

54:06 ↗ street improvements themselves in

54:08 ↗ newport being a very busy street um

54:10 ↗ issaquah is already working on

54:12 ↗ a point of future plan to help manage

54:15 ↗ that with the roundabout being part of

54:17 ↗ that um to try and address the vehicle

54:20 ↗ volume along newport way

54:22 ↗ all right thank you um

54:25 ↗ and as far as hauling in and out soil

54:28 ↗ that's all going to come from 7th and

54:30 ↗ that that's not going to be coming from

54:31 ↗ newport as you had said so when they're

54:34 ↗ developing the site

54:35 ↗ um the main entrance is going to be on

54:37 ↗ the other side on the 7th avenue that's

54:39 ↗ where you're going to be coming in and

54:40 ↗ out of

54:42 ↗ as far as the development yeah the the

54:44 ↗ final

54:45 ↗ entry like the actual vehicular entrance

54:48 ↗ to the site will be off of 7th we have

54:50 ↗ at this stage not gotten to the point of

54:52 ↗ developing like a construction plan

54:54 ↗ um and that would be in

54:57 ↗ consultation with city staff as well in

54:59 ↗ terms of what works best for them with

55:02 ↗ we do have three frontages on the site

55:04 ↗ so we do have a lot of options which is

55:06 ↗ somewhat unique to the site as opposed

55:08 ↗ to

55:09 ↗ a site that's bounded by

55:11 ↗ neighboring parcels on all sites and you

55:13 ↗ just have your one right away from it so

55:14 ↗ we do have some flexibility there but we

55:16 ↗ at this time we don't we haven't

55:17 ↗ developed a plan for how the

55:19 ↗ construction bill that would be

55:21 ↗ would be addressed and how that would be

55:22 ↗ phased

55:23 ↗ and then as far as the time frame of the

55:26 ↗ build out

55:27 ↗ is there

55:28 ↗ so

55:29 ↗ um

55:30 ↗ as we kind of went over at the end there

55:33 ↗ the

55:34 ↗ and as holly keaton had mentioned the

55:36 ↗ process would be to make this

55:37 ↗ application for the site development

55:39 ↗ permit um and that cipa will be included

55:42 ↗ in that there's a variety of reviews and

55:45 ↗ back and forth with the city in terms of

55:47 ↗ responding to their recommendations and

55:49 ↗ comments

55:50 ↗ um and

55:51 ↗ the timeline on that could be

55:54 ↗ two to three months

55:56 ↗ it's hard to say there the review times

55:58 ↗ are are hit and miss um just broadly

56:01 ↗ across the region right now and there's

56:04 ↗ a lot of work going on so

56:06 ↗ once we kind of get through that process

56:10 ↗ we would look to get recommended for

56:12 ↗ approval

56:14 ↗ and come back before the development

56:16 ↗ commission and then with their approval

56:18 ↗ the

56:19 ↗ permit for doing the site work and for

56:22 ↗ the buildings themselves could be

56:23 ↗ applied for

56:24 ↗ um and

56:26 ↗ from there it'd be another round of

56:27 ↗ review so

56:29 ↗ all told um

56:31 ↗ in terms of when the shovel actually

56:32 ↗ hits the dirt that's still months and

56:35 ↗ months

56:36 ↗ 12 to 18 months out

56:39 ↗ okay thank you so much

56:56 ↗ so

56:57 ↗ um i don't know

57:01 ↗ right as part of and that's part of that

57:03 ↗ whole roundabout plan is is that

57:06 ↗ yeah

57:07 ↗ so

57:07 ↗ um

57:09 ↗ it's that's one of

57:11 ↗ you know as we kind of tried to state an

57:13 ↗ application that whole roundabout

57:14 ↗ scenario is a little bit influx and

57:16 ↗ amorphous right now

57:18 ↗ because they're still working through

57:20 ↗ the design of it so

57:22 ↗ what that finally looks like and kind of

57:24 ↗ where it falls in relation to your

57:25 ↗ property

57:26 ↗ um would be hard to say but

57:29 ↗ i mean for your sign you'd still have

57:31 ↗ the frontage there so i would hope that

57:33 ↗ they you know you'd find it a good place

57:35 ↗ to put

57:36 ↗ and with the

57:38 ↗ with the right-of-way with between our

57:40 ↗ project and yours there should still be

57:41 ↗ decent visibility

57:43 ↗ as you come around the corner there

57:46 ↗ thank you and i just remind our speakers

57:48 ↗ that your comments must be made at the

57:49 ↗ lectern or the microphone's not going to

57:51 ↗ pick up on the recording or otherwise so

57:53 ↗ thank you

57:54 ↗ and if we could be mindful of the five

57:56 ↗ minute limit of course uh who is next to

57:59 ↗ speak

58:00 ↗ yes sure we have charles signed up

58:10 ↗ okay then we have linda signed up

58:13 ↗ okay

58:15 ↗ then we have amy quinn

58:20 ↗ hi i'm amy quinn live at 708 7th avenue

58:23 ↗ across the street from the project

58:25 ↗ just a couple of questions

58:27 ↗ in relationship to the elementary school

58:29 ↗ right across the street on holly

58:32 ↗ there are a number of families that walk

58:34 ↗ their kids back and forth to school

58:38 ↗ and with integrating the traffic circle

58:41 ↗ at holly and

58:43 ↗ newport

58:46 ↗ knowing full well that

58:48 ↗ coming out of a traffic circle it's a

58:50 ↗ horrible place to walk

58:52 ↗ how

58:54 ↗ that

58:55 ↗ that needs to be addressed and and

58:58 ↗ looked at for families and

59:01 ↗ you know eight nine ten-year-olds

59:02 ↗ walking back and forth to school by

59:04 ↗ themselves

59:06 ↗ and then along with families

59:08 ↗ the

59:09 ↗ public space in

59:12 ↗ within within your complex

59:16 ↗ will that have

59:19 ↗ facilities for young families the the

59:21 ↗ school is not really available the

59:24 ↗ playground area is not available during

59:26 ↗ school days

59:27 ↗ and then after school programming it

59:29 ↗ continues to be locked

59:31 ↗ it's not it's not really available to

59:33 ↗ the public on a very regular basis so

59:36 ↗ being that it's a townhome complex with

59:39 ↗ a couple of bedrooms and two car garages

59:41 ↗ and

59:42 ↗ things like that there's going to be

59:43 ↗ families that move into there and

59:46 ↗ that

59:47 ↗ that

59:48 ↗ recreation needs to be provided for

59:50 ↗ those young a tot lot whatever

59:52 ↗ you would you would call that would be

59:54 ↗ um

59:55 ↗ probably an important amenity and then

59:58 ↗ would that amenity be available to

1:00:01 ↗ the neighborhood

1:00:02 ↗ in

1:00:03 ↗ that aspect so

1:00:06 ↗ i would concur with

1:00:08 ↗ john that developing part of the block

1:00:11 ↗ with sidewalk and parking

1:00:13 ↗ is not a great alternative and that that

1:00:15 ↗ it really does need to be finished all

1:00:17 ↗ the way up to

1:00:18 ↗ juniper so the city should probably be

1:00:20 ↗ looking into that along with that

1:00:22 ↗ project because to just end it as john

1:00:24 ↗ said

1:00:25 ↗ it it's a good piece stretch for people

1:00:28 ↗ to go from lovely sidewalk with

1:00:31 ↗ bike routes to

1:00:33 ↗ what it is now

1:00:35 ↗ um

1:00:36 ↗ so those are my comments

1:00:40 ↗ again thank you for your comments um

1:00:42 ↗ in relation to the crossing at the

1:00:44 ↗ roundabout um

1:00:46 ↗ most of that would be driven by the

1:00:48 ↗ city's design plans for that roundabout

1:00:50 ↗ that would all be

1:00:52 ↗ factored into the design that they come

1:00:53 ↗ up with that so providing a form of safe

1:00:56 ↗ crossing

1:00:58 ↗ and that would obviously tie in with the

1:01:00 ↗ improvements that we do along the front

1:01:01 ↗ of our site and corresponding to that

1:01:04 ↗ but where that crossing may fall

1:01:07 ↗ is going to come from the plans for that

1:01:09 ↗ roundabout

1:01:10 ↗ and

1:01:11 ↗ um

1:01:13 ↗ for

1:01:15 ↗ the on-site

1:01:16 ↗ amenity space that we provided

1:01:19 ↗ so

1:01:20 ↗ because of the size of the development

1:01:22 ↗ and the number of units that we have

1:01:24 ↗ it actually triggers a mechanism in the

1:01:26 ↗ code to provide an additional

1:01:28 ↗ 400 feet of amenity area which is

1:01:31 ↗ largely what we're trying to show in

1:01:32 ↗ that center portion

1:01:35 ↗ what we showed there was kind of a

1:01:37 ↗ schematic look at something that could

1:01:39 ↗ be proposed there what the the final

1:01:42 ↗ arrangement of that may be will be

1:01:43 ↗ determined as we go through the review

1:01:45 ↗ process whether that's a play structure

1:01:47 ↗ or

1:01:48 ↗ more open

1:01:49 ↗ field more kind of ambiguous space for a

1:01:52 ↗ variety of activities um or something

1:01:54 ↗ more concrete like a play structure that

1:01:56 ↗ would that would be determined as we go

1:01:58 ↗ through the review process

1:02:02 ↗ without everything sorry i'm trying to

1:02:03 ↗ remember

1:02:07 ↗ the last one was the um just the

1:02:09 ↗ sidewalk and that was

1:02:10 ↗ mostly directed towards the commission

1:02:13 ↗ yeah so again that kind of goes back to

1:02:15 ↗ the the development standards for that

1:02:17 ↗ street

1:02:21 ↗ next person signed up to speak

1:02:26 ↗ we have no more in person signed up

1:02:29 ↗ okay is there anyone else who would like

1:02:31 ↗ to speak in the room who did not sign up

1:02:33 ↗ before

1:02:35 ↗ okay please come to lectern and

1:02:37 ↗ speak your name and proceed

1:02:42 ↗ yes

1:02:43 ↗ i'm jerry bernstein i also live in

1:02:46 ↗ bridgewater place

1:02:48 ↗ and i just have

1:02:50 ↗ a few

1:02:52 ↗ simple questions

1:02:54 ↗ i was curious as to what the setback

1:02:57 ↗ would be

1:02:58 ↗ for the edge of the building

1:03:01 ↗ to the sidewalk on 7th avenue

1:03:05 ↗ and i'm curious as to

1:03:08 ↗ in some places in your presentation you

1:03:10 ↗ talked about three stories

1:03:14 ↗ of

1:03:15 ↗ the townhomes being three stories but

1:03:18 ↗ the

1:03:19 ↗ the um

1:03:21 ↗ concept concept was showing like four

1:03:23 ↗ stories

1:03:25 ↗ so

1:03:25 ↗ and then i'm also curious as to

1:03:28 ↗ along 7th avenue

1:03:30 ↗ how compatible

1:03:32 ↗ compatible it would be

1:03:34 ↗ to

1:03:36 ↗ the bridgewater place across the street

1:03:38 ↗ so those are my questions okay

1:03:41 ↗ appreciate the questions

1:03:42 ↗ um so in regards to the setbacks um in

1:03:46 ↗ alignment with the standards for this

1:03:49 ↗ central isquad district um they

1:03:52 ↗ encourage the creation of a street wall

1:03:54 ↗ along those frontages so they actually

1:03:56 ↗ want they're encouraging you to pull the

1:03:58 ↗ buildings forward to maintain a sense of

1:04:00 ↗ of street edge along the edge of the

1:04:03 ↗ right-of-way there so the setback could

1:04:05 ↗ be anywhere from zero to ten feet

1:04:07 ↗ in those instances we what we are

1:04:09 ↗ proposing on our site plan along our

1:04:11 ↗ three frontages ranges anywhere from

1:04:14 ↗ maybe two to four feet set back from

1:04:17 ↗ um the backup sidewalk

1:04:20 ↗ for

1:04:20 ↗ um or sorry from the edge of the

1:04:23 ↗ property line and then where the

1:04:24 ↗ sidewalk falls in relation to that would

1:04:26 ↗ be

1:04:26 ↗ kind of up to what the final plans for

1:04:28 ↗ the french improvements are

1:04:30 ↗ so we'll see them in the site plan more

1:04:33 ↗ or less

1:04:34 ↗ that we could

1:04:35 ↗ then because

1:04:36 ↗ because i was thinking it would just be

1:04:38 ↗ more compatible to have a

1:04:42 ↗ wider setback with

1:04:44 ↗ the property across the street you know

1:04:47 ↗ closer to the 10 feet

1:04:49 ↗ yeah

1:04:50 ↗ no

1:04:52 ↗ that's a comment okay um

1:04:55 ↗ so yeah i mean basically what we're

1:04:57 ↗ trying to do there is is fulfill

1:05:00 ↗ the requirements that the city has in

1:05:02 ↗ their design standards for developing

1:05:04 ↗ that street edge obviously those

1:05:05 ↗ buildings are broken up

1:05:07 ↗ in the way

1:05:08 ↗ that they're positioned along those

1:05:09 ↗ frontages so we don't you know there's

1:05:11 ↗ the gap there's gaps between the

1:05:13 ↗ buildings it's not just a continuous

1:05:14 ↗ building base and that allows for the

1:05:16 ↗ ability to provide that through block

1:05:18 ↗ passage

1:05:19 ↗ um to provide some of the little like

1:05:21 ↗ pocket park landscape areas between the

1:05:23 ↗ buildings as well

1:05:25 ↗ but there are there are certain zoning

1:05:27 ↗ requirements that we have to be in

1:05:29 ↗ compliance with in relation to the

1:05:31 ↗ setbacks along the frontages

1:05:32 ↗ specifically

1:05:34 ↗ [Music]

1:05:35 ↗ and then in relation to the

1:05:37 ↗ the building height or the number of

1:05:39 ↗ stories

1:05:40 ↗ um so the

1:05:42 ↗ the concept for the townhomes is that

1:05:44 ↗ they would be three-story units

1:05:46 ↗ but with the steeply pissed roof we

1:05:49 ↗ would want to take

1:05:50 ↗ that area that's inside the actual roof

1:05:52 ↗ like underneath the roof surface that

1:05:54 ↗ what would be an attic and make that a

1:05:56 ↗ habitable space which is an amenity to

1:05:58 ↗ the residents

1:06:00 ↗ giving them additional space and then

1:06:02 ↗ also allowing us to do those dormers

1:06:04 ↗ along the front facade and so that's

1:06:06 ↗ where you get some of the variation

1:06:08 ↗ where it's four stories and then down to

1:06:10 ↗ three stories

1:06:11 ↗ and again

1:06:12 ↗ with the

1:06:14 ↗ working within the architectural and

1:06:16 ↗ urban design manual that's trying to

1:06:18 ↗ provide some of the architectural

1:06:20 ↗ articulation that they're looking for

1:06:22 ↗ along

1:06:23 ↗ those street faces with the varying

1:06:25 ↗ heights and the in the dormer and gable

1:06:27 ↗ reforms

1:06:28 ↗ okay so

1:06:30 ↗ okay so when would we be able to see

1:06:34 ↗ what

1:06:35 ↗ um the architect

1:06:36 ↗ you have designed long seventh house

1:06:39 ↗ sure so um as part of this scp submittal

1:06:43 ↗ for this the site development permit

1:06:45 ↗ a big chunk of that is going to be from

1:06:47 ↗ holly's team on the the civil side in

1:06:50 ↗ the landscape side and that's all kind

1:06:51 ↗ of the site related stuff

1:06:53 ↗ that is you know the horizontal layout

1:06:55 ↗ of the site but as part of that as well

1:06:57 ↗ there's the design review aspect and so

1:06:59 ↗ we will be submitting a full set of

1:07:01 ↗ rendered elevations

1:07:03 ↗ as well as

1:07:04 ↗ example building plans

1:07:07 ↗ and those would all be available as part

1:07:08 ↗ of that submittal

1:07:11 ↗ okay

1:07:12 ↗ all right no i don't believe i have any

1:07:15 ↗ more questions thank you thank you

1:07:18 ↗ thank you is there anyone else in the

1:07:20 ↗ room who would like to speak on the

1:07:21 ↗ topic

1:07:23 ↗ hearing none mr patrick do we have

1:07:25 ↗ anyone online who's signed up to speak

1:07:29 ↗ giving them one minute

1:07:34 ↗ yes i see one raised hand

1:07:38 ↗ connie i'm going to unmute you and make

1:07:41 ↗ you a panelist now

1:07:47 ↗ all right okay so

1:07:50 ↗ i am joining in from san francisco here

1:07:54 ↗ because i just can't stay away from you

1:07:56 ↗ all i'm connie marshall i live up on

1:07:58 ↗ squawk

1:08:00 ↗ so i'm going to shotgun my comments

1:08:04 ↗ and i'm going to start with being in the

1:08:07 ↗ mur the mur district which

1:08:10 ↗ i looked at the zoning map

1:08:12 ↗ not really central issaquah

1:08:15 ↗ i agree with the 4.52 units

1:08:18 ↗ so i'm not really understanding where

1:08:19 ↗ you're coming up with the concept that

1:08:22 ↗ you are fulfilling the vision

1:08:25 ↗ um

1:08:26 ↗ when you aren't really in the central

1:08:27 ↗ isla plan from what i can see so i'm not

1:08:31 ↗ sure that the design manual actually

1:08:34 ↗ works so

1:08:36 ↗ at least i don't think you have to do

1:08:38 ↗ the things in the design manual so i

1:08:41 ↗ suspect the city is saying something to

1:08:44 ↗ you that i'm not sure

1:08:47 ↗ the rest of the community agrees with

1:08:50 ↗ but

1:08:51 ↗ there you there you have that now

1:08:54 ↗ i'm going to move back to

1:08:57 ↗ transportation because that's a hot

1:08:59 ↗ topic

1:09:00 ↗ so in your cipa

1:09:03 ↗ study of transportation i think you're

1:09:06 ↗ also going to be having to look the

1:09:08 ↗ impacts to juniper because you are in a

1:09:12 ↗ in sort of a going around the block

1:09:15 ↗ scenario where people can enter in a

1:09:17 ↗ variety of places and exit in a variety

1:09:20 ↗ of places so i think your impacts to

1:09:22 ↗ juniper are also going to be

1:09:24 ↗ considerable

1:09:27 ↗ the

1:09:28 ↗ fronting on newport

1:09:32 ↗ in the future of a roundabout i'm not

1:09:35 ↗ sure about what the city development

1:09:37 ↗ standards will be

1:09:39 ↗ with fronting development on the back

1:09:42 ↗ side

1:09:43 ↗ of a roundabout

1:09:45 ↗ also on holly i see that you would end

1:09:47 ↗ up with extra right-of-way now granted

1:09:51 ↗ the the sketch that you put in i was

1:09:53 ↗ strongly told by the city that that is

1:09:56 ↗ not the current sketch

1:09:58 ↗ and so we don't really know what's going

1:10:00 ↗ to happen but we do know that the land

1:10:03 ↗ all around you is going to change

1:10:06 ↗ so i would like to understand how you

1:10:09 ↗ are going to change your development to

1:10:11 ↗ fit in with a future land change that

1:10:14 ↗ seems very difficult

1:10:16 ↗ um

1:10:18 ↗ but i would like a description of how

1:10:20 ↗ you imagine that that is beyond just

1:10:23 ↗ well we'll do what they say and we'll

1:10:25 ↗ figure it out

1:10:26 ↗ so what will you do with extra land what

1:10:29 ↗ will you do if you end up with your back

1:10:31 ↗ to a roundabout

1:10:33 ↗ and how will you make this place

1:10:35 ↗ habitable

1:10:37 ↗ so

1:10:38 ↗ is the through block passage

1:10:41 ↗ public you didn't answer the question

1:10:43 ↗ that was addressed by someone else

1:10:46 ↗ so um

1:10:48 ↗ are the people going to be able to use

1:10:50 ↗ this space

1:10:53 ↗ and then are there going to be interim

1:10:56 ↗ traffic improvements before that you

1:10:59 ↗ have to hook into a roundabout and what

1:11:02 ↗ are the temporary traffic improvements

1:11:05 ↗ that you are going to have for ingress

1:11:07 ↗ and egress as you develop

1:11:10 ↗ so then um i read your geotech report

1:11:14 ↗ which

1:11:15 ↗ included seismic hazard area which is a

1:11:18 ↗ critical area erosion hazard which is a

1:11:21 ↗ critical area and an incredibly shallow

1:11:25 ↗ groundwater level

1:11:27 ↗ where james also said that there is

1:11:30 ↗ ponding so i suspect you actually do

1:11:32 ↗ have a wetland and wetland

1:11:35 ↗ buffer

1:11:36 ↗ so i do disagree with the concept that

1:11:39 ↗ you don't have critical areas on your

1:11:41 ↗ site

1:11:44 ↗ now your wet dirt and your incredibly

1:11:47 ↗ fine soils will not support structure so

1:11:50 ↗ this means you're going to have a large

1:11:53 ↗ amount of dirt moving which is going to

1:11:55 ↗ have significant transportation

1:11:58 ↗ impacts on the neighborhood

1:12:01 ↗ and also on how you're going to have be

1:12:04 ↗ having to handle water

1:12:06 ↗ on your site so i would be interested to

1:12:10 ↗ understand

1:12:11 ↗ baker tanks where are they going how's

1:12:14 ↗ it going to handle with the community

1:12:16 ↗ and then one other suggestion with

1:12:19 ↗ developments that have been tight like

1:12:21 ↗ this is they have created email lists

1:12:23 ↗ for all of the adjacent neighbors so

1:12:25 ↗ that they could keep them in the plan as

1:12:27 ↗ the dell development continues so they

1:12:30 ↗ have some idea what's going to happen

1:12:32 ↗ week to week and they've popped out

1:12:34 ↗ these emails every week to make people

1:12:37 ↗ happy around them and they've had

1:12:39 ↗ signage with numbers on them that people

1:12:42 ↗ can call night or day if they're having

1:12:44 ↗ issues one other thing

1:12:47 ↗ is it seems like you're going to have

1:12:49 ↗ difficult soil work in the wet season

1:12:51 ↗ anyway because of your

1:12:53 ↗ your your soils and just love water and

1:12:55 ↗ become more unstable and you have a

1:12:57 ↗ school across the way so if i were the

1:13:00 ↗ city i would require that you do your

1:13:02 ↗ earth moving and most of your exterior

1:13:05 ↗ grading in the summer season to keep it

1:13:08 ↗ out of the school and and the stability

1:13:12 ↗ issues with wet

1:13:14 ↗ soils

1:13:15 ↗ so

1:13:16 ↗ uh i think

1:13:18 ↗ in i hope that was within five minutes

1:13:21 ↗ but i have fulfilled my list

1:13:23 ↗ thank you

1:13:27 ↗ thank you again for taking the the time

1:13:29 ↗ to join us

1:13:30 ↗ virtually

1:13:32 ↗ i'll try and kind of run through

1:13:35 ↗ feel free to chime in because

1:13:38 ↗ there's quite a few items in there and i

1:13:40 ↗ want to make sure that i take the time

1:13:41 ↗ to adjust them

1:13:43 ↗ starting with the

1:13:45 ↗ uh the roundabout and the frontage

1:13:47 ↗ improvements um and the way that the

1:13:48 ↗ site is responding to that so as part of

1:13:50 ↗ the proposal

1:13:52 ↗ um from the pre-op process

1:13:55 ↗ forward or from in development of the uh

1:13:57 ↗ the plans for the pre-op we were in

1:13:59 ↗ contact with the city and that's where

1:14:00 ↗ we

1:14:02 ↗ were made

1:14:04 ↗ knowledgeable of the proposed roundabout

1:14:06 ↗ project and have been working in tandem

1:14:08 ↗ with city staff

1:14:10 ↗ to the best of our ability with the

1:14:12 ↗ plans that they've provided us to

1:14:14 ↗ respond to that so

1:14:16 ↗ the site plan on the south western

1:14:19 ↗ corner of our

1:14:20 ↗ six parcels is uh dedicating an area of

1:14:24 ↗ land kind of a trapezoid triangular

1:14:27 ↗ trapezoidal area that would go towards

1:14:29 ↗ creating that roundabout

1:14:31 ↗ and that's why on the site plan you'll

1:14:33 ↗ see

1:14:34 ↗ the arrangement of buildings kind of

1:14:36 ↗ responding to that change in the

1:14:38 ↗ property lines there to accommodate that

1:14:40 ↗ that future installation

1:14:43 ↗ as for the area that is to the

1:14:46 ↗ south of the site that

1:14:49 ↗ in the

1:14:50 ↗ proposal roundabout plans um kind of the

1:14:54 ↗ roundabout swoops out there and so i

1:14:56 ↗ think that's what you're referencing

1:14:58 ↗ in relation to the additional site area

1:15:01 ↗ that area

1:15:03 ↗ in and of itself would not be going to

1:15:05 ↗ our development it would not be part of

1:15:08 ↗ our proposal at least at this stage so

1:15:10 ↗ that would be

1:15:12 ↗ you know developed in accordance with

1:15:14 ↗ the plans that the city has for that

1:15:17 ↗ that area that is newly being created

1:15:21 ↗ to your question about what the interim

1:15:25 ↗ improvements would be

1:15:28 ↗ that is a question that our applicant

1:15:30 ↗ team is still trying to understand as

1:15:31 ↗ well given that

1:15:33 ↗ the proposal for the roundabout and

1:15:35 ↗ those frontages is is still under design

1:15:38 ↗ and somewhat in flux

1:15:40 ↗ and that's something that we look to

1:15:41 ↗ address with city staff moving forward

1:15:45 ↗ in terms of what they would like us to

1:15:47 ↗ install in the interim assuming that our

1:15:49 ↗ project

1:15:50 ↗ runs in front of what those final

1:15:52 ↗ improvements would be

1:15:53 ↗ uh so the i guess stay tuned for what

1:15:57 ↗ the final proposal for those interim

1:15:59 ↗ improvements would be

1:16:01 ↗ i'm going to comment just for a second

1:16:03 ↗ here you realize we've been working on

1:16:05 ↗ that design for 30 years

1:16:08 ↗ so

1:16:10 ↗ so don't hold your breath

1:16:13 ↗ on on on that one in the interim

1:16:16 ↗ you're going to design to the straight

1:16:19 ↗ road

1:16:21 ↗ that is what we have shown on the

1:16:23 ↗ current proposal and that is

1:16:25 ↗ basically the point that we had arrived

1:16:27 ↗ at in needing to prep the

1:16:30 ↗ materials for this meeting again what

1:16:32 ↗ the final resolution

1:16:34 ↗ of what interim improvements may be put

1:16:37 ↗ in

1:16:37 ↗ is something that we hope to work

1:16:39 ↗ through in

1:16:40 ↗ the permitting process here

1:16:43 ↗ so then the

1:16:45 ↗ putting the fronts of the buildings up

1:16:48 ↗ onto newport way because those are the

1:16:51 ↗ fronts of the buildings correct correct

1:16:53 ↗ what happened to that if it does turn

1:16:55 ↗ into a roundabout

1:16:58 ↗ so those buildings would still be

1:17:00 ↗ fronting that public right-of-way there

1:17:02 ↗ and as part of the roundabout

1:17:05 ↗ improvements the concept would be that

1:17:07 ↗ there would be you know public sidewalk

1:17:09 ↗ that is included with those improvements

1:17:11 ↗ and so those

1:17:12 ↗ buildings along that frontage would be

1:17:14 ↗ creating

1:17:15 ↗ um you know a street presence and and

1:17:17 ↗ have their front entries facing the

1:17:19 ↗ public realm in that in those areas

1:17:22 ↗ okay thanks we're going to need to move

1:17:24 ↗ on now to our next commenter do we have

1:17:25 ↗ someone else online signed up to

1:17:28 ↗ speak no chair i don't see anybody else

1:17:31 ↗ online signed up this week

1:17:33 ↗ all right thank you and thank you all

1:17:35 ↗ for your comments tonight

1:17:37 ↗ and for your input and starting this

1:17:38 ↗ dialogue i think you've driven out a lot

1:17:40 ↗ of points that weren't obvious from the

1:17:42 ↗ beginning

1:17:43 ↗ so i now going to turn it over to the

1:17:46 ↗ development commission

1:17:47 ↗ and open the florida commissioners does

1:17:50 ↗ anyone have a question or comment for

1:17:52 ↗ the applicant

1:17:57 ↗ uh mr chair just uh a

1:18:00 ↗ comment on the building design i know

1:18:02 ↗ you've heard a lot about the site and

1:18:04 ↗ and

1:18:04 ↗ transportation impacts and

1:18:06 ↗ uh we'll come back to those

1:18:08 ↗ so though can you talk a little bit more

1:18:11 ↗ about how these buildings will interface

1:18:14 ↗ it in the kind of the pedestrian space

1:18:17 ↗ and the entries

1:18:19 ↗ are there going to be covers over the

1:18:21 ↗ entries will there be extending out

1:18:23 ↗ partially over the sidewalk provide some

1:18:25 ↗ pedestrian protection a little bit more

1:18:27 ↗ about what you're thinking is about how

1:18:29 ↗ these will interface

1:18:30 ↗ uh in the pedestrian environment sure

1:18:33 ↗ um so in relation to the pedestrian

1:18:35 ↗ entries for the units they all

1:18:38 ↗ either front along their existing

1:18:39 ↗ right-of-way frontages or along that

1:18:41 ↗ interior through block passage that's

1:18:43 ↗ through the site so the public realm um

1:18:45 ↗ in both senses

1:18:47 ↗ um and

1:18:49 ↗ the the plan for what that entry will

1:18:51 ↗ look like we've provided um there aren't

1:18:54 ↗ plans in this presentation but there

1:18:56 ↗ would be essentially an entry porch or

1:18:58 ↗ stoop that would be covered

1:19:00 ↗ and that's kind of integral to the

1:19:01 ↗ building architecture

1:19:03 ↗ which you could see a little bit in

1:19:04 ↗ elevation and then just landscaping and

1:19:08 ↗ and other

1:19:09 ↗ kind of yard and facade treatments to

1:19:12 ↗ try and soften

1:19:13 ↗ that street edge and make it at a human

1:19:15 ↗ scale and something that's enjoyable for

1:19:17 ↗ passerby walking by and also for you

1:19:20 ↗ know you coming home to your front entry

1:19:21 ↗ of your unit right and then as far as um

1:19:26 ↗ private sites you've got to balance that

1:19:28 ↗ with privacy and and security for the

1:19:31 ↗ residents as well so

1:19:33 ↗ um it'll be interesting to see a little

1:19:35 ↗ bit more about you know how that

1:19:37 ↗ interface looks when you bring back to

1:19:39 ↗ the come back for the public hearing

1:19:40 ↗ sure um a question about the through

1:19:43 ↗ block connection

1:19:45 ↗ um

1:19:46 ↗ so

1:19:47 ↗ it is a public it is a public space and

1:19:50 ↗ it's open to the public that's the the

1:19:52 ↗ point to give people with the larger

1:19:53 ↗ blocks an opportunity to kind of shorten

1:19:56 ↗ their

1:19:56 ↗ their uh trip with the through block

1:19:58 ↗ connection can you talk a little bit

1:20:00 ↗ about how that will interface um at

1:20:02 ↗ newport and at seventh um

1:20:05 ↗ uh how it would be inviting for people

1:20:07 ↗ to actually come

1:20:09 ↗ be welcomed into that space instead of

1:20:10 ↗ feeling like it's private because the

1:20:12 ↗ idea is it would be

1:20:14 ↗ enough a public amenity sure um so

1:20:20 ↗ first off i'll lead off by saying that

1:20:21 ↗ all of the details in terms of how that

1:20:23 ↗ will be worked out haven't been worked

1:20:25 ↗ out at this point in the design process

1:20:28 ↗ but from a conceptual standpoint along

1:20:31 ↗ seventh and along newport the idea would

1:20:33 ↗ be

1:20:34 ↗ to treat that as somewhat of a courtyard

1:20:36 ↗ space so it's on seventh avenue it would

1:20:38 ↗ be framed by buildings on both sides of

1:20:40 ↗ that

1:20:40 ↗ um and so

1:20:42 ↗ the

1:20:43 ↗ if you can imagine having

1:20:45 ↗ units with their front entries that are

1:20:46 ↗ fronting onto that space it has a 10

1:20:48 ↗ foot sidewalk going through the middle

1:20:50 ↗ of it and trying to create an inviting

1:20:52 ↗ space that feels like kind of a portal

1:20:55 ↗ to the site or an entry point to the

1:20:57 ↗ site from the pedestrian realm

1:20:59 ↗ and then on the newport side

1:21:03 ↗ this

1:21:04 ↗ site

1:21:05 ↗ geometry gets a little

1:21:07 ↗ tight there with the roundabout

1:21:08 ↗ improvement so there's actually an

1:21:10 ↗ opportunity to do something

1:21:13 ↗ at that frontage that maybe is more

1:21:16 ↗ public in nature and a little bit more

1:21:18 ↗ inviting because we have a decent amount

1:21:21 ↗ of room and kind of this triangular

1:21:22 ↗ shaped parcel

1:21:24 ↗ to do something with with vegetation and

1:21:28 ↗ trellising or arbors or something that

1:21:30 ↗ creates again another kind of an

1:21:32 ↗ entryway to the site there

1:21:34 ↗ thank you

1:21:38 ↗ mr morgan

1:21:40 ↗ um

1:21:41 ↗ thank you chair the um do you want

1:21:43 ↗ questions and comments same time yes

1:21:46 ↗ this is our opportunity do it all right

1:21:48 ↗ um okay

1:21:50 ↗ um thank you very much for coming in the

1:21:51 ↗ presentation and thank you to all the

1:21:53 ↗ public obviously for being here tonight

1:21:55 ↗ coming out to

1:21:57 ↗ express your opinions

1:21:58 ↗ especially ex-commissioner trey grouch

1:22:00 ↗ nice to see you again so

1:22:02 ↗ um

1:22:03 ↗ the uh

1:22:05 ↗ hollywood it be possible to pull up this

1:22:06 ↗ site design

1:22:09 ↗ a psych plan

1:22:16 ↗ and maybe while she's doing that i can

1:22:18 ↗ ask you one question about the

1:22:21 ↗ number i should point out at the

1:22:22 ↗ beginning i do appreciate how you the

1:22:25 ↗ efforts you've made to meet the arts and

1:22:26 ↗ crafts style

1:22:28 ↗ because

1:22:29 ↗ these are all kind of new styles from

1:22:31 ↗ the central area plan and so going

1:22:33 ↗ through it i appreciate a lot of things

1:22:34 ↗ you've done with that one of the

1:22:36 ↗ questions i had to mentions in i think

1:22:38 ↗ your narrative

1:22:39 ↗ that there there's a minimum of 8 12

1:22:42 ↗ pitch the primary is 10 12

1:22:44 ↗ and it looks like most of the verse i

1:22:46 ↗ could see were 10 12 and i think the

1:22:48 ↗ arts and crafts requires all the pitches

1:22:50 ↗ to be the same so i wondered where the

1:22:52 ↗ 812 was

1:22:54 ↗ is that just canopies or something like

1:22:56 ↗ that that you wouldn't notice or

1:22:59 ↗ a couple places where that might show up

1:23:01 ↗ is

1:23:02 ↗ over those low roofs

1:23:04 ↗ but that could be something that is

1:23:06 ↗ worked with and adjusted to get to 1012

1:23:08 ↗ and then

1:23:09 ↗ it wasn't in the images that were

1:23:11 ↗ presented but you would see it in the

1:23:13 ↗ full

1:23:14 ↗ application packet for the design review

1:23:17 ↗ on the rear side of the units we do have

1:23:20 ↗ a couple modulated bays in some of the

1:23:23 ↗ buildings in which we've gone kind of

1:23:25 ↗ with a shed that springs from the same

1:23:28 ↗ point coming down but that would be at a

1:23:30 ↗ lower

1:23:31 ↗ roof slope obviously to you know define

1:23:34 ↗ that element coming down

1:23:35 ↗ um that was something that we were

1:23:37 ↗ proposing in the design it was in

1:23:39 ↗ alignment with a couple of the images

1:23:41 ↗ that were

1:23:42 ↗ included in the imagery for arts and

1:23:45 ↗ crafts within the manual

1:23:47 ↗ whether that strictly complies with the

1:23:49 ↗ requirements you know we're certainly

1:23:51 ↗ open to feedback on but that was um

1:23:55 ↗ those were the areas where we wouldn't

1:23:56 ↗ be having the 10-12 pitch okay but the

1:23:59 ↗ vast majority of the

1:24:01 ↗ appearance wise yeah so that that

1:24:03 ↗ elevation that was up on screen is is

1:24:05 ↗ broadly representative of the look that

1:24:08 ↗ we're going for with

1:24:09 ↗ um you know an overall gable front to

1:24:12 ↗ back and then using those dormer

1:24:14 ↗ features

1:24:15 ↗ to provide interest and break up the

1:24:16 ↗ facade okay thank you and it looked to

1:24:20 ↗ me that um

1:24:23 ↗ in what is shown there

1:24:26 ↗ i'm trying to remember if this is the

1:24:28 ↗ street facing or interior facing

1:24:31 ↗ this would be a street page facing yeah

1:24:34 ↗ and i thought on some of the one of the

1:24:36 ↗ other plans that showed an arched entry

1:24:38 ↗ over a door i think one of the facets

1:24:41 ↗ that was listed for arts and crafts were

1:24:44 ↗ arched entries it looked like these

1:24:46 ↗ doors might be a rectangular door

1:24:50 ↗ would that be something that would

1:24:52 ↗ and given the the design has a lot of

1:24:54 ↗ very

1:24:55 ↗ you know rectangular geometric straight

1:24:58 ↗ lines

1:24:58 ↗ would it be possible to look at more

1:25:00 ↗ arched entry ways for these doors as

1:25:03 ↗ partly way to

1:25:04 ↗ to differentiate them and meet that not

1:25:06 ↗ a not a specific requirement but one of

1:25:09 ↗ the things they look for

1:25:10 ↗ yeah um so the the entries as you said

1:25:13 ↗ that we are proposing is kind of a

1:25:15 ↗ rectilinear opening that we would be

1:25:17 ↗ highlighting with some ornate brick work

1:25:20 ↗ around it either turning the course of

1:25:22 ↗ the brick or providing a headstone some

1:25:24 ↗ combinations of that

1:25:26 ↗ but as you noted in the design

1:25:28 ↗ requirements it does speak somewhat to

1:25:31 ↗ using the arched form so

1:25:34 ↗ that could certainly be something that's

1:25:35 ↗ investigated as as part of the process

1:25:37 ↗ as well great thank you um

1:25:41 ↗ the it also in and this might be for

1:25:44 ↗ staff it mentioned in the staff report

1:25:46 ↗ roof heights of 40

1:25:48 ↗ or 35 to 45 or 40 to 45

1:25:52 ↗ that looked like the um in the staff

1:25:53 ↗ report the limit was 40. there was a

1:25:56 ↗ mention of 45 foot heights but i wasn't

1:25:59 ↗ sure where that would have been if

1:26:00 ↗ that's a

1:26:02 ↗ so this is actually a good question that

1:26:04 ↗ we had discussed as the applicant team

1:26:08 ↗ the

1:26:09 ↗ by the reading of the code we understand

1:26:11 ↗ the building height

1:26:13 ↗ by its code definition to be measured to

1:26:15 ↗ the midpoint of the roof but when we

1:26:17 ↗ were asked to provide the numbers for

1:26:20 ↗ that staff report they were asking for

1:26:22 ↗ the peak

1:26:23 ↗ so that was actually a concern that

1:26:26 ↗ that were a potential question that we

1:26:28 ↗ were you know looking to come up

1:26:30 ↗ at this meeting in that the numbers if

1:26:33 ↗ we're measuring to the peak that we

1:26:34 ↗ provided look like they're out of

1:26:35 ↗ compliance but

1:26:37 ↗ if we're defining building height by the

1:26:39 ↗ definition that's in the code that

1:26:41 ↗ number would be lower because it's at

1:26:42 ↗ the midpoint of that gable does that

1:26:44 ↗ make sense okay yeah it definitely does

1:26:46 ↗ sounds like that something would work

1:26:48 ↗ out and probably before you have the sdp

1:26:51 ↗ yeah i mean yeah what we what we would

1:26:54 ↗ show in the submittal for stp would be

1:26:56 ↗ compliance with the building height

1:26:58 ↗ regulation and demonstrating that height

1:27:01 ↗ dimension based on the midpoint of the

1:27:03 ↗ roof excellent thank you

1:27:06 ↗ um

1:27:08 ↗ and one thing that it looked like the

1:27:09 ↗ the images we were shown were for

1:27:11 ↗ building five and interior building

1:27:15 ↗ i guess my largest concern

1:27:17 ↗ appearance-wise might be

1:27:19 ↗ the east side of building one facing

1:27:22 ↗ seventh avenue which is a 105 foot long

1:27:26 ↗ building

1:27:27 ↗ and i think there are two unit entrances

1:27:29 ↗ there

1:27:30 ↗ but then a fairly long blank

1:27:34 ↗ wall and we don't know what that

1:27:35 ↗ building looks like there

1:27:37 ↗ and then i think the

1:27:40 ↗ building four

1:27:42 ↗ facing seventh is also the side of a

1:27:44 ↗ building so i guess design wise one of

1:27:48 ↗ my concerns will be

1:27:50 ↗ what does it look like along 7th avenue

1:27:52 ↗ especially for the neighbors across the

1:27:54 ↗ street

1:27:55 ↗ but for anybody going down there

1:27:57 ↗ especially a long hundred foot long

1:28:01 ↗ building

1:28:02 ↗ facade how's that going to fit in

1:28:06 ↗ and what you could do there so

1:28:08 ↗ don't have to answer with what you do

1:28:10 ↗ tonight but i think that would be a

1:28:11 ↗ concern yeah um apologies for not having

1:28:15 ↗ images that show that um but much in the

1:28:18 ↗ same manner of this um elevation here

1:28:21 ↗ the that facade along seventh would be

1:28:23 ↗ um it does have the front unit entries

1:28:26 ↗ um and then you mentioned building uh

1:28:29 ↗ five which has the building four which

1:28:31 ↗ has the side elevation what we've done

1:28:33 ↗ there

1:28:34 ↗ um which again i can't show you a visual

1:28:36 ↗ of but is take the unit entry and put it

1:28:39 ↗ on the corner of the building to try and

1:28:41 ↗ you know make that a visual centerpiece

1:28:43 ↗ to that elevation since it is a side

1:28:46 ↗ elevation

1:28:47 ↗ and then also things like that you can

1:28:49 ↗ see on here we have the balconies up the

1:28:52 ↗ upper levels

1:28:54 ↗ same type of materiality with the brick

1:28:56 ↗ and

1:28:57 ↗ that going more than just one story

1:28:59 ↗ above grade um and then again the

1:29:02 ↗ varying roofline so that would be that

1:29:04 ↗ would all be in the packet that we

1:29:06 ↗ submit and i apologize for not having an

1:29:08 ↗ image of it but that that sense would be

1:29:10 ↗ along those street frontages right so

1:29:12 ↗ that same brick

1:29:13 ↗ base you think yep great

1:29:16 ↗ excellent thank you

1:29:17 ↗ um

1:29:19 ↗ and then the

1:29:22 ↗ roundabout design is an interesting

1:29:24 ↗ question having just driven through the

1:29:26 ↗ redone roundabout on eastlake spanish

1:29:28 ↗ parkway

1:29:29 ↗ um and wondering hopefully the city

1:29:31 ↗ comes up with a long-term roundabout

1:29:33 ↗ design that they don't have to rebuild

1:29:34 ↗ for you

1:29:36 ↗ the

1:29:38 ↗ um and then i think the

1:29:40 ↗ it to me it is strange for the city to

1:29:43 ↗ require to build a sidewalk that

1:29:44 ↗ essentially

1:29:46 ↗ ends at somebody's driveway right in the

1:29:48 ↗ middle of somebody's driveway

1:29:50 ↗ but i can understand long-term and i

1:29:52 ↗ guess it would be nice to know either

1:29:53 ↗ that the city has plans to

1:29:56 ↗ fully improve that sidewalk all the way

1:29:59 ↗ down

1:30:00 ↗ or

1:30:01 ↗ make it a more narrow street with

1:30:03 ↗ parking just on one side

1:30:05 ↗ instead of just having deer sitting

1:30:06 ↗ there for perhaps a long time without it

1:30:08 ↗ so that's i guess a comment for the city

1:30:11 ↗ be nice to know

1:30:12 ↗ when that's going to be done how it's

1:30:14 ↗ going to be done and all that so again

1:30:15 ↗ thank you very much appreciate it thank

1:30:18 ↗ you

1:30:19 ↗ mr

1:30:22 ↗ hello um i want to say we had great

1:30:25 ↗ public comments tonight you all covered

1:30:28 ↗ many of my comments and questions

1:30:30 ↗ i do have a few follow-up items

1:30:34 ↗ um will there be a crosswalk

1:30:37 ↗ across

1:30:38 ↗ seventh or holly

1:30:40 ↗ away from the roundabout we kind of

1:30:41 ↗ talked about pedestrians at the

1:30:42 ↗ roundabout but at the other corner

1:30:45 ↗ yeah so that's a good question um

1:30:47 ↗ i think a lot of that will be generated

1:30:50 ↗ by the traffic scoping that we do for

1:30:51 ↗ the project and recommend

1:30:53 ↗ recommendations that they have in

1:30:54 ↗ relation to that for how that

1:30:56 ↗ intersection is handled at the corner of

1:30:58 ↗ 7th and holly

1:31:00 ↗ as of right now that hasn't been

1:31:01 ↗ addressed in the proposal

1:31:03 ↗ um and then

1:31:05 ↗ again i hate to keep going back to this

1:31:07 ↗ round this roundabout

1:31:09 ↗ um but

1:31:11 ↗ you know that actually encroaches pretty

1:31:14 ↗ far

1:31:14 ↗ in the pro state of what we know of it

1:31:16 ↗ now encroaches pretty far towards that

1:31:19 ↗ intersection of 7th and holly so

1:31:22 ↗ depending on what the plan is for where

1:31:24 ↗ a crosswalk whether that's more towards

1:31:26 ↗ the circle or more towards where it

1:31:27 ↗ starts to neck down again

1:31:30 ↗ that could start to play into

1:31:32 ↗ how that intersection is handled i think

1:31:34 ↗ okay

1:31:36 ↗ um i noticed

1:31:37 ↗ there was a wall detail included in the

1:31:39 ↗ packet and maybe i missed the location

1:31:42 ↗ but where are you anticipating walls

1:31:44 ↗ so that mine of holly doesn't have

1:31:47 ↗ slides up anywhere and i think that was

1:31:49 ↗ probably on the landscape

1:31:51 ↗ slide there with the community space

1:31:53 ↗ area

1:31:54 ↗ and i think that would just be kind of

1:31:56 ↗ like a landscape feature or something to

1:31:59 ↗ delineate space maybe provide a low seat

1:32:02 ↗ wall

1:32:02 ↗ um for pedestrians to stop and sit on as

1:32:05 ↗ they're moving through the site or

1:32:06 ↗ through the space well uh it was more of

1:32:08 ↗ a fill wall with a drainage detail

1:32:10 ↗ behind it but um but you're not

1:32:13 ↗ anticipating any walls like retaining

1:32:14 ↗ walls like in terms of site retaining

1:32:16 ↗ walls yeah no not at this time okay

1:32:20 ↗ um

1:32:24 ↗ okay i think that's all my comments

1:32:26 ↗ okay

1:32:27 ↗ any other questions from commissioners

1:32:30 ↗ thanks i have

1:32:32 ↗ just a few in a comment

1:32:34 ↗ first i was curious

1:32:36 ↗ why was the

1:32:38 ↗ overall goal for townhomes reduced from

1:32:40 ↗ 30 to 29.

1:32:43 ↗ there was a reference i think in uh the

1:32:45 ↗ project narrative that you're going to

1:32:47 ↗ build 30.

1:32:48 ↗ yeah so at the pre-app stage i believe

1:32:51 ↗ we were showing a concept that had 32

1:32:54 ↗ townhomes on it

1:32:55 ↗ and that has been revised

1:32:57 ↗ to help better accommodate the thought

1:33:01 ↗ process behind in the intent behind the

1:33:03 ↗ through block passage through the site

1:33:05 ↗ as well as

1:33:07 ↗ um responding to

1:33:09 ↗ the

1:33:10 ↗ the feedback that we received at the

1:33:12 ↗ pre-op in terms of what that should look

1:33:14 ↗ like um what the require what we had

1:33:16 ↗ proposed at the pre-app was a potential

1:33:18 ↗ deviation from the the standards of the

1:33:21 ↗ three block passage

1:33:22 ↗ um because we had a

1:33:24 ↗ set of units located on the site that

1:33:27 ↗ created a pinch point just based on the

1:33:28 ↗ site geometries so to better provide the

1:33:32 ↗ standard of what the throughput passage

1:33:34 ↗ should be we took some of those units

1:33:36 ↗ away

1:33:37 ↗ to better develop that concept and

1:33:39 ↗ provide the through blockbuster suicide

1:33:41 ↗ that was the primary driving factor

1:33:42 ↗ there was a couple of other there was

1:33:44 ↗ some drainage and vault location

1:33:47 ↗ that also factored into that as well as

1:33:48 ↗ the tree retention up at the north of

1:33:50 ↗ the site okay that leads to another

1:33:52 ↗ question i had on through black

1:33:56 ↗ i believe on page 40 it says the site

1:33:59 ↗ design includes two primary and one

1:34:01 ↗ secondary

1:34:02 ↗ pedestrian only through block passage is

1:34:05 ↗ there a secondary passage there that i'm

1:34:07 ↗ not seeing on the design no there's not

1:34:09 ↗ that's that's an oversight

1:34:11 ↗ yeah

1:34:12 ↗ plan right okay thanks

1:34:14 ↗ um

1:34:15 ↗ getting to the arts and crafts style i'm

1:34:18 ↗ not an expert on this

1:34:20 ↗ but we may have some comments from the

1:34:22 ↗ architects on the commission later on so

1:34:24 ↗ i had some questions i wonder if the

1:34:26 ↗ darker masonry

1:34:28 ↗ that's shown in the packet there

1:34:30 ↗ is appropriate that high in the building

1:34:32 ↗ for arts and crafts style you might take

1:34:34 ↗ a check on that in the architecture and

1:34:36 ↗ urban design manual okay i think the

1:34:38 ↗ horizontal windows on the first level

1:34:40 ↗ are not really in a typical arts and

1:34:43 ↗ crafts effect um and together with that

1:34:47 ↗ i think multiple smaller window panes is

1:34:50 ↗ more typical of arts and crafts than i'm

1:34:52 ↗ really seeing on the design there so you

1:34:54 ↗ might take a look at those and i think

1:34:57 ↗ it would be helpful obviously to see

1:34:59 ↗ colors of materials

1:35:01 ↗ uh especially with a materials uh packet

1:35:04 ↗ later on in in the process so we can get

1:35:06 ↗ a little clearer idea what those are

1:35:08 ↗ tonight i'm seeing a little bit more

1:35:09 ↗ detail than we did on the original

1:35:11 ↗ packet of colors of those materials

1:35:13 ↗ yeah we actually over here on the side

1:35:15 ↗ we brought a couple material boards for

1:35:17 ↗ those two schemes and we can set them

1:35:19 ↗ out and you guys are free to you know

1:35:21 ↗ walk by and take a look at them okay um

1:35:24 ↗ and i just i guess a couple of questions

1:35:26 ↗ back to you and really so for the window

1:35:29 ↗ panes are you

1:35:30 ↗ referencing the actual window sizes

1:35:32 ↗ themselves or like the grids within the

1:35:34 ↗ the panes within the windows

1:35:37 ↗ windows window i think you tend to see a

1:35:39 ↗ lot of detail in arts and crafts design

1:35:42 ↗ within those windows understand the some

1:35:44 ↗ more contemporary take off in arts and

1:35:46 ↗ crafts so you right but you just might

1:35:48 ↗ look at what you can do within sure that

1:35:49 ↗ yep

1:35:50 ↗ that criterion and then finally just

1:35:52 ↗ comment uh i'd like to appre i

1:35:55 ↗ appreciate uh

1:35:56 ↗ your cognizance of the city's

1:35:58 ↗ sustainability goals

1:36:00 ↗ and some of the steps and practices you

1:36:02 ↗ highlighted that you were looking at

1:36:04 ↗ possibly taking solar ready roofs

1:36:07 ↗ energy star appliances heat pumps

1:36:11 ↗ water sense fixtures and minimizing the

1:36:13 ↗ need for permanent irrigation so i think

1:36:15 ↗ that's a plus

1:36:18 ↗ any other comments from the development

1:36:19 ↗ commission tonight commissioner brennan

1:36:21 ↗ yeah just since i didn't add a comment

1:36:23 ↗ at the end of my questions

1:36:25 ↗ um we did hear a lot from the public

1:36:27 ↗ dine and really appreciate

1:36:30 ↗ people spending time with us

1:36:32 ↗ and giving us your input but a lot

1:36:34 ↗ around pedestrian safety and traffic

1:36:37 ↗ impacts and if you think about the

1:36:39 ↗ redevelopment that's happening in this

1:36:41 ↗ area now

1:36:42 ↗ the multi-family projects to the north

1:36:44 ↗ along with the shopping center up there

1:36:47 ↗ definitely can see how

1:36:49 ↗ we're experiencing more congestion

1:36:51 ↗ concern about pedestrian safety so we'll

1:36:54 ↗ uh i'll be interested when this comes

1:36:56 ↗ back to understand a little bit more

1:36:59 ↗ about

1:37:00 ↗ how that's being addressed kind of on

1:37:02 ↗ the ground and i know like you've talked

1:37:05 ↗ in your responses about the roundabout

1:37:07 ↗ not being you know still in kind of

1:37:09 ↗ amorphous stage you know some work yet

1:37:12 ↗ to be done there

1:37:13 ↗ but just how pedestrians will access the

1:37:15 ↗ site um and how um if there's needed

1:37:18 ↗ traffic calming the city may be able to

1:37:20 ↗ provide us some information about the

1:37:23 ↗ plans specifically for seventh but i'm

1:37:25 ↗ just in this particular vicinity

1:37:28 ↗ because it is we are seeing as planned

1:37:31 ↗ higher density uh in development and

1:37:33 ↗ with that comes the need to ensure being

1:37:36 ↗ attentive to the

1:37:37 ↗ um the capacitive needs of the safety

1:37:39 ↗ needs of the people that live and and

1:37:41 ↗ work through there or travel through

1:37:42 ↗ there so

1:37:43 ↗ just a comment um hopefully we can have

1:37:46 ↗ a little bit more detail when it comes

1:37:47 ↗ back on that

1:37:48 ↗ sure

1:37:51 ↗ any other comments from the commission

1:37:52 ↗ tonight

1:37:54 ↗ okay thank you development commission

1:37:56 ↗ comments are closed for this evening

1:37:58 ↗ like to move on to reports i'd like to

1:38:00 ↗ ask staff to provide any updates on city

1:38:02 ↗ council meetings or activities

1:38:11 ↗ good evening commissioners and members

1:38:13 ↗ of the community

1:38:15 ↗ really good feedback on this project

1:38:18 ↗ we do have want to take a minute to

1:38:20 ↗ thank you all for your participation in

1:38:22 ↗ the title 18 update and that process has

1:38:25 ↗ been going along

1:38:26 ↗ but before we do that um

1:38:29 ↗ we wanted you know we want to announce

1:38:31 ↗ um that we are fully staffed now we've

1:38:34 ↗ added completed our team with the

1:38:36 ↗ planning manager position and uh

1:38:39 ↗ christian guys is here if you don't mind

1:38:41 ↗ turning on your camera and saying hi to

1:38:43 ↗ the commissioners

1:38:46 ↗ he

1:38:47 ↗ will be your staff liaison

1:38:51 ↗ and

1:38:52 ↗ he comes to us from city of kirkland

1:38:56 ↗ where he's worked for the last 15 years

1:38:58 ↗ um he started as a planner and i was a

1:39:01 ↗ planning supervisor there

1:39:04 ↗ so um christian take it away and

1:39:07 ↗ i thanks for joining and listening into

1:39:10 ↗ your first meeting it says day two

1:39:12 ↗ working for the city

1:39:14 ↗ um

1:39:16 ↗ yeah er very glad to be here very very

1:39:18 ↗ excited uh

1:39:19 ↗ such an interesting and uh dynamic way

1:39:22 ↗ to involve the public from

1:39:25 ↗ the the beginning of a project so i

1:39:28 ↗ really appreciate that and this will be

1:39:30 ↗ a lot of fun to

1:39:31 ↗ to get my feet wet and some new new

1:39:34 ↗ process and code and i hope i can

1:39:37 ↗ help out

1:39:38 ↗ with the staff and

1:39:40 ↗ developers and the public so

1:39:46 ↗ great thank you um

1:39:49 ↗ and uh we'll send you an email uh

1:39:52 ↗ christian will send you an email so you

1:39:53 ↗ have his contact information and um and

1:39:56 ↗ you know so you can reach out to him uh

1:39:58 ↗ he'll be your main point of uh contact

1:40:00 ↗ from the staff side

1:40:02 ↗ um

1:40:04 ↗ and

1:40:05 ↗ the other thing we wanted to share with

1:40:06 ↗ you is the title 18 update we are on

1:40:09 ↗ part six of six

1:40:11 ↗ uh so you all have been involved with uh

1:40:14 ↗ you know various sections and chapters

1:40:16 ↗ and so we're at the the last bucket

1:40:20 ↗ um and the last meeting on that is

1:40:22 ↗ august 25th

1:40:24 ↗ um we will send you a link to the packet

1:40:28 ↗ uh we had planned a lot of joint

1:40:29 ↗ meetings and didn't want you know trying

1:40:31 ↗ to balance the workload of different

1:40:32 ↗ boards and commissions we did not set

1:40:34 ↗ this up as a joint meeting

1:40:36 ↗ but wanted to kind of tell you about

1:40:38 ↗ this particular topic that that's on the

1:40:40 ↗ agenda for august 25th

1:40:42 ↗ it pertains to processes and procedures

1:40:45 ↗ um so during the early stages you'd

1:40:47 ↗ given us the feedback of the role of

1:40:49 ↗ development commission what comes to you

1:40:52 ↗ all what stays with the

1:40:55 ↗ the staff administrative level um and so

1:40:57 ↗ on and so forth so we've taken that

1:40:59 ↗ feedback and proposed this draft where

1:41:03 ↗ some of the discussion we want to have

1:41:05 ↗ with the planning and policy commission

1:41:06 ↗ is the size of the buildings that fall

1:41:09 ↗ within the administrative review versus

1:41:11 ↗ the development commission review of

1:41:13 ↗ course we're taking in what's in the

1:41:14 ↗ code currently and proposing a couple of

1:41:17 ↗ options to kind of streamline the

1:41:19 ↗ process a little bit um and make it more

1:41:22 ↗ clear and consistent and fair

1:41:24 ↗ uh the second thing in that bucket is um

1:41:28 ↗ you know really um you you all had said

1:41:31 ↗ perhaps there should be an interim

1:41:33 ↗ administrative decision for technical

1:41:35 ↗ things like the geotechnical reports and

1:41:37 ↗ critical area reports so we've built

1:41:40 ↗ that into the process uh where the focus

1:41:43 ↗ for the development commission would be

1:41:45 ↗ on a very clear criteria so we've added

1:41:47 ↗ the new criteria for a site development

1:41:50 ↗ review

1:41:51 ↗ so all of that will be packaged and

1:41:53 ↗ we'll send you a link

1:41:55 ↗ up to three members of the development

1:41:57 ↗ commission can attend without making a

1:41:59 ↗ quorum on that meeting if you would

1:42:01 ↗ rather attend

1:42:03 ↗ the meeting in person

1:42:05 ↗ or virtually sorry um

1:42:08 ↗ or in person

1:42:10 ↗ but

1:42:12 ↗ no more than three can attend unless we

1:42:14 ↗ have to notify

1:42:15 ↗ it as a public meeting or if you don't

1:42:18 ↗ have the time uh and want to send us

1:42:20 ↗ your comments by email that would be

1:42:22 ↗ great too but honestly we you know i

1:42:24 ↗ think we we really really appreciate you

1:42:27 ↗ the value you brought to the title 18

1:42:29 ↗ update and and your excellent comments

1:42:31 ↗ for all the previous project

1:42:33 ↗ chapters

1:42:34 ↗ um so this is the home stretch for the

1:42:36 ↗ first round of course there will be the

1:42:37 ↗ consolidated draft that will come out of

1:42:39 ↗ after the bucket six so that's all in

1:42:42 ↗ terms of announcements thank you

1:42:46 ↗ thank you are there any other items of

1:42:48 ↗ business or announcements from staff

1:42:53 ↗ there being no further business before

1:42:55 ↗ the commission this meeting is adjourned

1:42:57 ↗ at 8 43 pm thank 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 (4)

Sanford

Commissioners Brennan

Morgan

Shore

Staff (3)

Minnie Dhaliwal, Director, CP&D Christian Geitz, Planning Manager Holly Keeton, Senior Planner Stephen Padua, Long Range Planning Manager 2. Approval of Minutes a) CHAIR SANFORD asked for corrections or comments regarding the July 6, 2022 Minutes. There were none

the Minutes were approved. b) CHAIR SANFORD asked for corrections or comments regarding the July 20, 2022 Minutes. There were none

the Minutes were approved. 3