Economic Vitality Commission – Special Meeting · Thursday, October 20, 2016 · City Council Digest

3361 segments .txt ↗

0:13 ↗ a year nowbody.

0:19 ↗ Yeah, I know. I just called.

0:22 ↗ We're getting the party started. Hello

0:24 ↗ everyone.

0:26 ↗ That was my Carl House moment there.

0:29 ↗ Is everybody ready to begin? Am I on?

0:31 ↗ Yes. Thank you. First um order of

0:35 ↗ business. I don't know if it's an order,

0:36 ↗ it's a guideline. Um make sure we all

0:38 ↗ talk into our microphones tonight

0:40 ↗ because there is a huge television

0:42 ↗ audience watching us tonight. Come on

0:45 ↗ in. Come on in. So, um I just had a

0:48 ↗ reminder from AV that we should all talk

0:50 ↗ into our microphones to make sure that

0:52 ↗ all of our comments are heard. Welcome

0:54 ↗ everybody to the first of um several um

0:59 ↗ meetings with the planning policy

1:01 ↗ commission, the human services

1:03 ↗ commission, and the economic vitality

1:05 ↗ commission. F I'm Trish Hainan. I'm from

1:08 ↗ development services, and I have the

1:10 ↗ happy honor of being part of the housing

1:12 ↗ strategy that we're all going to be

1:14 ↗ working on together. And first I would

1:16 ↗ love everyone to um say who you are and

1:19 ↗ what commission you're on as we go

1:20 ↗ around the I'm going to call it the

1:22 ↗ United Nations table where all the

1:23 ↗ commissioners are. We'll start with

1:25 ↗ Joan. So I'm Joan Pro. I'm the chair of

1:27 ↗ the planning policy.

1:30 ↗ I'm John Stab. I'm on the Planning

1:32 ↗ Policy Commission. I'm Joy Lewis. I'm on

1:34 ↗ the Planning Policy Commission. Derek

1:37 ↗ Franklin, Human Services Commission.

1:40 ↗ His human services commission.

1:43 ↗ Ron Fall on the Policy and Planning

1:45 ↗ Commission. Jeff Howard, Economic

1:48 ↗ Vitality Commission.

1:50 ↗ Derek Do, Economic Vitality Commission.

1:53 ↗ Laura Milligan, Economic Vitality.

1:59 ↗ Christy Triple, Rally Properties. And

2:02 ↗ one thing I did, and I'm on the Economic

2:04 ↗ Vitality Commission, one thing I did

2:05 ↗ want to share, I do work for a property

2:08 ↗ owner here in Isiqua and that manages

2:11 ↗ property. We have an affordable housing

2:14 ↗ component within our development

2:15 ↗ agreement with the city. But I wanted to

2:17 ↗ make that aware to all of you as my

2:19 ↗ peers this evening that I'm here with my

2:21 ↗ hat on for the good of the city and the

2:23 ↗ overall vitality for this community. So

2:25 ↗ if anyone has an issue or thinks it's a

2:27 ↗ conflict of interest, I definitely want

2:30 ↗ to make sure I put that on the table.

2:33 ↗ Uh Ethan Styles, Economic Vitality

2:36 ↗ Commission.

2:38 ↗ Richard Gable, Economic Vitality

2:40 ↗ Commission. That didn't work. Excellent.

2:45 ↗ And Elizabeth, you get to go now. Just

2:48 ↗ say who you are and which commission

2:50 ↗ you're on. Elizabeth Mopen. I'm on the

2:53 ↗ Human Services Commission. Excellent.

2:55 ↗ Anybody else we missed?

2:58 ↗ Okay, then. Um

3:01 ↗ um this was in your packet. You've

3:03 ↗ received some information this past week

3:05 ↗ and there was a few homework

3:07 ↗ assignments. Um but first, I'm going to

3:09 ↗ give you a little bit of why we're here.

3:11 ↗ And uh the council has a goal to have a

3:15 ↗ housing strategy partly because they had

3:17 ↗ a affordable housing goal a few years

3:20 ↗ ago. We did a report card on affordable

3:22 ↗ housing last summer and we weren't doing

3:24 ↗ very well as a city and we're not doing

3:27 ↗ very well as a region. So they asked us

3:30 ↗ to do a housing strategy, not just for

3:32 ↗ affordability, but a complete housing

3:34 ↗ strategy. And this is the uh work plan

3:37 ↗ we came out with. We're in the second

3:39 ↗ step of the um housing strategy. We had

3:42 ↗ an inventory that was presented to the

3:44 ↗ council in September and you all are

3:47 ↗ going to help us with the needs analysis

3:49 ↗ so we can figure out do we have any gaps

3:51 ↗ in affordability? Do we have gaps in the

3:53 ↗ types of houses that we offer in Isiqua

3:56 ↗ and we're going to be doing outreach?

3:58 ↗ We're going to be using all of your

4:00 ↗ heads and thoughts and experiences to

4:02 ↗ help us craft a really great um needs

4:05 ↗ assessment so we can send that off into

4:08 ↗ step three, which you'll also be

4:09 ↗ involved in, which would be figuring out

4:11 ↗ um the policy conversation and what

4:13 ↗ policies will help us to implement a

4:16 ↗ good housing strategy for the city.

4:20 ↗ Um one of the homeworks I uh that we

4:23 ↗ asked you to do is some items that you

4:25 ↗ thought were amazing. uh some t some

4:28 ↗ numbers or some statistics that you

4:30 ↗ thought were pretty amazing in the

4:31 ↗ inventory in the material we had you

4:33 ↗ read. And these were um a couple of mine

4:36 ↗ that um that surprised me is that um

4:39 ↗ over 30% um are are people with kids in

4:44 ↗ our community. I thought it was higher

4:46 ↗ than that, but it's it's not as high as

4:48 ↗ I thought it was. And 30% of folks are

4:51 ↗ just living on their own here. Um so we

4:53 ↗ have a whole singles component. So, I

4:55 ↗ thought that was really interesting as

4:57 ↗ as the types of households that we have

4:59 ↗ here in our community. The other one

5:01 ↗ that I I was I knew about just because

5:03 ↗ I've been doing so many annexations is

5:05 ↗ we've grown a lot a lot since 2000 and

5:09 ↗ this doesn't include um the folks like

5:12 ↗ from South Cove that we inherited um the

5:15 ↗ other um annexations. So, this is just

5:18 ↗ actual people that have moved here since

5:20 ↗ 2000. So 16,000 have moved here since um

5:25 ↗ since 2000. of those folks that live

5:28 ↗ here and work here, only 1,500 people

5:32 ↗ actually live here and work here. Which

5:35 ↗ gives us an idea of why there's so much

5:37 ↗ traffic going in and out of town is we

5:40 ↗ don't have a huge amount or even a um

5:43 ↗ small amount, you know, like a majority

5:45 ↗ of folks that actually live and work

5:47 ↗ here and don't have to go in and out on

5:50 ↗ our arterials to to go to and from work.

5:52 ↗ So, one of the things we're looking at

5:54 ↗ is is there a way that we can make the

5:56 ↗ balance a little better to have people

5:58 ↗ able to choose to work and live here.

6:00 ↗ Um, that's something that we'll be

6:02 ↗ working on. Um,

6:05 ↗ the other housing fact that felt was

6:07 ↗ interesting is the largest share of our

6:10 ↗ housing inventory is three bedrooms or

6:12 ↗ more. So when you think of the kids that

6:14 ↗ we have and the singles that we have,

6:17 ↗ three bedrooms or more, they they may be

6:20 ↗ pretty big for the folks that actually

6:22 ↗ are living in the community. So that was

6:24 ↗ something that that I thought was an

6:25 ↗ interesting fact. So with that, my time

6:29 ↗ is up and I think it goes to to Jen,

6:33 ↗ goes to Arthur already. Are you ready?

6:42 ↗ See, I have to escape.

6:44 ↗ No. Escape.

6:47 ↗ And then what?

6:54 ↗ You don't want these markers? I do. Oh,

6:57 ↗ that I will leave in there. Do you want

6:59 ↗ me to start it or do you want to start

7:00 ↗ it?

7:03 ↗ Why isn't it easy to start it?

7:08 ↗ There it is. Right.

7:19 ↗ Hi everybody. So I'm met with some of

7:24 ↗ you in the past and your different

7:25 ↗ commissions and um over the years and

7:28 ↗ I've basically been working on housing

7:31 ↗ stuff. The city of Isiqua is a member of

7:33 ↗ ARCH and ARCH is just a partnership of

7:35 ↗ cities in East King County um that was

7:37 ↗ formed by the cities to provide

7:40 ↗ resources to the cities to have

7:42 ↗ specialized staff and the ability to

7:44 ↗ work together on some issues around

7:46 ↗ housing and with a special emphasis on

7:48 ↗ what we refer to as affordable housing.

7:51 ↗ And so I have been literally working on

7:53 ↗ stuff in Isiqua longer than Keith I

7:56 ↗ believe. Um, I literally worked on the

7:59 ↗ original development agreement for

8:01 ↗ Isiqua Highlands back in the early 90s.

8:04 ↗ So, I have been around this city off and

8:06 ↗ on. Um, and so tonight and and my job is

8:10 ↗ one of our jobs at all is to help cities

8:12 ↗ talk about the issue of housing in their

8:14 ↗ community. So you got some data there

8:17 ↗ and before we come back to you and let

8:20 ↗ you start what's your reaction to data

8:22 ↗ and see what questions you have. I

8:24 ↗ wanted to give you some thoughts and

8:26 ↗ context that might help set up not only

8:29 ↗ tonight's conversation but the work that

8:31 ↗ you're helping the city do which is to

8:34 ↗ work on creating a strategy plan. So,

8:36 ↗ it's about thinking about housing in

8:39 ↗ different ways besides just what you saw

8:41 ↗ from Trish, which is, well, we have this

8:43 ↗ many housing units and we have this many

8:45 ↗ one-bedrooms and two bedrooms. There's

8:47 ↗ other ways of thinking about housing

8:49 ↗ when you're trying to put a plan

8:51 ↗ together. Um, and so the first thing I

8:54 ↗ want to do is put up on here is what do

8:58 ↗ we mean? Because the term affordability,

9:00 ↗ I could probably go around the room and

9:02 ↗ ask each of you what you think

9:03 ↗ affordability means. And there's 1 2 3 4

9:06 ↗ 5 6 7 there's over 10 of you and there

9:08 ↗ would be over 10 answers and you'd all

9:10 ↗ be right. Okay. So, one of the things um

9:14 ↗ I used to do development, we never use

9:15 ↗ the term affordable, low-inccome housing

9:17 ↗ or anything like that. We would say

9:19 ↗ we're helping people at a certain income

9:20 ↗ level with rent at a certain level. And

9:22 ↗ that's what this chart does. It sort of

9:24 ↗ gives you some context as to what we're

9:26 ↗ talking about because this is what the

9:28 ↗ comp plan says. So, this is the plan

9:29 ↗ that we have to work from. This is the

9:31 ↗ terminology we use. And so in the last

9:34 ↗ few years, we've in in the comprehensive

9:37 ↗ plan work that we've done, we identify

9:39 ↗ three different levels of quote

9:40 ↗ affordability per se. Um, and they all

9:43 ↗ work off of median income. And the

9:45 ↗ median income right now in King County

9:48 ↗ is 90,000, just over 90,000 for a family

9:51 ↗ of four. And all the numbers you see in

9:53 ↗ this chart work from this table, from

9:55 ↗ that one number. And so, um, what it is

9:58 ↗ for a f for what we call very low

10:00 ↗ income, that's 30% of median income,

10:03 ↗ that's an income of 18,000, just over

10:06 ↗ 18,000 to almost $27,000 a year.

10:09 ↗ Somebody in that income range would be

10:11 ↗ able to afford a rent of around $500 to

10:14 ↗ around $700 a month. That's what would

10:16 ↗ be considered affordable. Affordable is

10:18 ↗ defined as onethird of your income

10:20 ↗ towards housing expenses.

10:22 ↗ Low income is $31,000 to $45,000 a year

10:26 ↗ depending on your household size and

10:28 ↗ means rents of $790 to $1,130

10:32 ↗ a month. And moderate income is 1,264

10:36 ↗ to$,800

10:37 ↗ um and is an income of up to $72,000 a

10:40 ↗ year. So if you translate that to hourly

10:42 ↗ wages, um $30,000

10:45 ↗ that's the low end for the low income is

10:47 ↗ $15 an hour. that magical number that we

10:49 ↗ hear about in context sometimes in

10:51 ↗ discussions like in Seattle and around

10:53 ↗ the country about minimum wages. So you

10:56 ↗ can see here that when we're talking

10:57 ↗ about these different affordability

10:58 ↗ levels, they're still talking about

11:01 ↗ levels that are salaries for people in

11:04 ↗ our in in our community in our region.

11:07 ↗ Um, what we've also added on this slide,

11:09 ↗ and this is in the data that we gave

11:10 ↗ you, is what our average rents right now

11:12 ↗ in Isiqua, and you can see they

11:14 ↗ average,0 for a studio to well over

11:17 ↗ 2,000 for a three-bedroom, which is

11:19 ↗ basically saying that you have to have

11:20 ↗ income over 80% of median to afford the

11:23 ↗ average price rental unit in the

11:25 ↗ community. We also have some information

11:27 ↗ here on slides that relate to um um

11:32 ↗ types of salaries you have in your

11:34 ↗ community and I'll come back to this one

11:36 ↗ in a bit but the point this slide makes

11:37 ↗ is there's a lot of jobs whose salaries

11:40 ↗ are in that even very low income and low

11:43 ↗ income range in your community. Okay. So

11:45 ↗ that's starting to get at a demand

11:48 ↗ thing. Where is the need for housing

11:50 ↗ coming from? A lot of it's coming from

11:51 ↗ your workforce. So the first thing I

11:53 ↗ want to ask you or now I'm going to sort

11:55 ↗ of back up for a second so that now that

11:57 ↗ you can sort of see these different

11:58 ↗ affordability levels is when I'm working

12:01 ↗ a community when I think about housing

12:03 ↗ and what I'm trying to do in a housing

12:05 ↗ plan or working with a city is what

12:07 ↗ we're trying to do is say what kind of

12:09 ↗ households do we have in our community

12:13 ↗ do I need to carry this with me when I'm

12:14 ↗ talking or

12:16 ↗ or be close to it. Okay. So, the

12:19 ↗ question is, what type of households do

12:22 ↗ we have in our community and what's

12:24 ↗ their income level? And so, I'm going to

12:26 ↗ ask you, I'm going to open up to you.

12:28 ↗ What kind of households? These are, you

12:29 ↗ know, household, you know, family type

12:31 ↗ units. Trish listed some, but let's

12:34 ↗ share with me what you think are the

12:35 ↗ different kinds of households in your

12:36 ↗ community. Anybody want to jump in

12:38 ↗ first?

12:41 ↗ So, I'm talking about like she said

12:43 ↗ there's married with children. Okay,

12:45 ↗ that's a kind of household. There's

12:47 ↗ different formations of people in living

12:49 ↗ in living situations. So what other

12:51 ↗ kinds of examples do we have?

12:52 ↗ Multigenerational.

12:54 ↗ Okay. So can I call it extended family?

12:56 ↗ Yes. Okay. So we have extended family.

13:02 ↗ We have

13:07 ↗ so that's one I said married

13:11 ↗ with children. Okay. Others single with

13:14 ↗ children. Someone else, please. Sorry, I

13:18 ↗ go way back with Elizabeth. Other

13:20 ↗ people, please. More than one family in

13:22 ↗ the same uh living unit. All right.

13:27 ↗ Family sharing. Does that cover it?

13:30 ↗ Okay. Others? Well, I'm just writing

13:32 ↗ while I hear. Married, no children.

13:34 ↗ Okay.

13:38 ↗ All right.

13:40 ↗ So, that was married, no children,

13:43 ↗ right? Yep. And I'm going to ask I'm

13:46 ↗ going to ask a leading question and that

13:49 ↗ is are there different types in terms of

13:53 ↗ pro potentially housing needs of that

13:56 ↗ group?

13:58 ↗ Within that group? Yeah. Within this

13:59 ↗ category of married with no children at

14:02 ↗ home, I can think of two very distinct

14:04 ↗ situations that are very different.

14:07 ↗ Yeah. Uh empty nesters versus young

14:11 ↗ family. Right. So you have the empty

14:12 ↗ neester and then you have the young

14:13 ↗ family. So you have both of those others

14:22 ↗ other types of households single single

14:24 ↗ with children. Single with children.

14:28 ↗ Okay. So a single parent with children

14:33 ↗ and just plain single individuals.

14:40 ↗ You do this all the time. Let's get

14:41 ↗ other people going. So I heard what did

14:43 ↗ I just hear? Single.

14:47 ↗ So I heard single others. Well, or let's

14:49 ↗ talk about singles for a minute. There's

14:51 ↗ probably different kinds of single

14:52 ↗ populations out there.

14:55 ↗ Seniors. Okay. You got single, senior,

14:57 ↗ others. Young adults. H young adults.

15:01 ↗ Okay. So you've got seniors, young

15:04 ↗ adults.

15:05 ↗ Okay. Others middle-aged adults. H

15:12 ↗ others I would say you're a college

15:14 ↗ student who's great student not yet

15:16 ↗ started a career. Okay. So college

15:18 ↗ student

15:21 ↗ which in some of the towns I work with

15:23 ↗ because Arch is a coalition of cities

15:25 ↗ all over East King County. That's a

15:27 ↗ really big issue in a couple of the

15:28 ↗ cities I work in. Belleview, Baththel,

15:30 ↗ right? Really big issue there. Even

15:31 ↗ Kirkland um has that and you're going to

15:34 ↗ maybe have that someday. So okay. Okay.

15:36 ↗ So, you have college, young adult,

15:37 ↗ senior, any other types of singles that

15:40 ↗ you can think of? Disabled. H disabled.

15:44 ↗ Thank you. Very good.

15:46 ↗ Disabled. And there's all kinds of

15:48 ↗ different disabilities.

15:52 ↗ Okay. Anybody else have any other ideas?

15:56 ↗ Divorces. Divorces. Okay. So, that's

16:03 ↗ okay. So think of this as one think of

16:08 ↗ this as a matrix and this is your y

16:11 ↗ axis.

16:12 ↗ Now your x- axis and I don't have a big

16:14 ↗ enough piece of paper here is I would do

16:17 ↗ income and income can be from zero

16:22 ↗ right no money to now depending on the

16:26 ↗ city we can literally say the richest

16:28 ↗ person in the world is king county if we

16:30 ↗ look at that area right and so it's

16:33 ↗ literally an exercise if you think about

16:36 ↗ it of drawing grids with different

16:38 ↗ income levels

16:41 ↗ and across like this,

16:44 ↗ right?

16:46 ↗ And the whole thing is you could look at

16:47 ↗ your community and you could start

16:50 ↗ figuring out

16:53 ↗ how many people you have in every box.

16:56 ↗ And your goal in a housing plan is to

16:59 ↗ have housing that matches that matrix.

17:02 ↗ Okay, that's when I go into a community,

17:05 ↗ that's what I'm always thinking. All

17:07 ↗ right. So that's just to give you some

17:09 ↗ context of how to think about a housing

17:11 ↗ strategy plan is it's really looking at

17:13 ↗ people in your community and their

17:16 ↗ different household and their different

17:17 ↗ circumstances which is primarily when

17:19 ↗ you think of housing types of households

17:22 ↗ and income and some different forms of

17:25 ↗ housing might be able to serve different

17:26 ↗ populations here. But the question is do

17:29 ↗ you have choices for all of those

17:30 ↗ different folks? Is that your workforce

17:33 ↗ population or your homeowner population?

17:36 ↗ that you're would be I mean your

17:37 ↗ workforce will have all different kinds

17:39 ↗ of people but you don't build a housing

17:41 ↗ for a workforce. I used to do

17:43 ↗ development. I buy saying okay I want to

17:45 ↗ do onebs because I think they're

17:46 ↗ singles. I'm going to do two bed. There

17:48 ↗ was a period when I first did

17:49 ↗ development we built a lot of twobedroom

17:51 ↗ two baths. Do you know why

17:54 ↗ was the Bay Area roommates?

17:57 ↗ Two individuals could live together and

17:59 ↗ both have bathrooms and because housing

18:00 ↗ expenses were getting so high that

18:02 ↗ having a two-bedroom, two bath could fit

18:04 ↗ for both a family and two individuals

18:07 ↗ and it made your market bigger for who

18:09 ↗ you could serve. So that's an example

18:11 ↗ where you know, but you're thinking

18:13 ↗ about all of these things. Oh, who might

18:15 ↗ go into that different product types I

18:17 ↗ would have and how many are out there in

18:19 ↗ the community? Are they having

18:20 ↗ challenges with other kinds of housing

18:22 ↗ needs? So, if I build that, I might fill

18:24 ↗ it up pretty good. That's why in

18:27 ↗ downtown Redmond, you see micro units

18:29 ↗ being built. And they built one and he

18:32 ↗ immediately built a second and he

18:34 ↗ immediately built a third because he

18:37 ↗ couldn't fill them up fast enough

18:39 ↗ because of the market demand coming from

18:41 ↗ a lot of the singles. You know, they

18:43 ↗ have a small school, right? They have

18:45 ↗ DigiPen there and things along those

18:46 ↗ lines. So it's taking the workforce but

18:50 ↗ you still transfer it back to incomes

18:53 ↗ and you know because there's a lot of

18:54 ↗ young singles in Redmond and therefore

18:56 ↗ they needed lower rents and given the

18:58 ↗ costs the best solution was small units

19:01 ↗ and not everyone will do that but there

19:03 ↗ was enough of a need that some

19:04 ↗ percentage wanted to do that. Okay so

19:07 ↗ that's one this is just sort of some

19:08 ↗ context for thinking about the issue. So

19:11 ↗ I started to allude to and you mentioned

19:13 ↗ it the workforce. So now I want to talk

19:15 ↗ a little bit about the demand and some

19:18 ↗ just show you a couple slides and again

19:20 ↗ all this information you have here was

19:21 ↗ in the report and we're going to come

19:22 ↗ back and let you share what you thought

19:24 ↗ was important. So I'm going to now do

19:26 ↗ what Trish did. And the first thing I've

19:28 ↗ always looked at and literally my thesis

19:32 ↗ was doing jobs housing balance in

19:34 ↗ Sunnyville, California. Anybody know

19:36 ↗ where Sunnyville, California is? It's

19:38 ↗ the heart of the Silicon Valley. And

19:40 ↗ they were having this was back in the

19:42 ↗ early 80s, believe it or not. they were

19:44 ↗ dealing with housing price issues and

19:46 ↗ what they looked at was jobs, housing

19:47 ↗ balance. So this idea is to say how much

19:51 ↗ demand are you generating from your

19:53 ↗ workforce and how much housing do you

19:56 ↗ have to house that workforce. Now the

19:58 ↗ reason we and you the first section is

19:59 ↗ looking at isiqua. If you're at one that

20:03 ↗ means your quote the amount of housing

20:05 ↗ in your community is equal to the amount

20:08 ↗ of demand from your workforce and the

20:10 ↗ amount of demand for workforce is you

20:11 ↗ assume more than one worker per

20:13 ↗ household. So, it's not a onetoone, you

20:14 ↗ know, if you have 10,000 jobs, you need

20:16 ↗ 10,000 housing units. Like, if you have

20:17 ↗ 10,000 jobs, you need like 7,500 housing

20:20 ↗ units because there's more than one

20:21 ↗ worker per household on average. On

20:23 ↗ average, there's not 1.4 in households,

20:26 ↗ but so when you go above one, it means

20:30 ↗ you have more demand from your workforce

20:34 ↗ than you do supply of housing. Now, it's

20:37 ↗ not necessarily a big deal if your city

20:40 ↗ is the like that and everybody around

20:42 ↗ you has the opposite because then it

20:44 ↗ adds up and you're at about one. Now, I

20:48 ↗ work in an area the arts sphere of in

20:49 ↗ arts is East King County and what what

20:52 ↗ we saw is back in 198 1980

20:55 ↗ the overall area had much more housing

20:58 ↗ than it had demand for housing from the

21:00 ↗ workforce. And that completely changed

21:02 ↗ over 15 years. Okay? from going from

21:05 ↗ well below one and this this only shows

21:07 ↗ you 2006 and then looking into the

21:10 ↗ future. But you can see when we add up

21:12 ↗ all of East King County, we are now to a

21:15 ↗ point where that ratio is 1.25.

21:17 ↗ You're higher than that. But even when

21:20 ↗ you add Bel when you add Belleview, when

21:22 ↗ you add the unincorporated areas where

21:23 ↗ there's no jobs, when you add that all

21:25 ↗ together, you have a ratio that's 1.25.

21:28 ↗ It's as high as Seattle's. And in the

21:31 ↗ old days, if you're old like me, the old

21:32 ↗ tradition was all the jobs were in the

21:34 ↗ central city and everybody lived outside

21:36 ↗ the central city and commuted back and

21:37 ↗ forth. Well, Seattle's that was the

21:40 ↗ ratio they had before. They've always

21:41 ↗ been around that ratio. But the thing

21:43 ↗ is, when we went above one, Seattle

21:45 ↗ didn't go down.

21:48 ↗ So now you've got two areas that are

21:50 ↗ creating more demand for housing, two

21:53 ↗ large areas, than they do housing

21:54 ↗ available. So that's what this chart's

21:56 ↗ trying to show you. And then the brown

21:58 ↗ is what does our plan say? what will

22:00 ↗ happen if we build exactly to our plan

22:03 ↗ and our plan says not only in your city

22:05 ↗ but in East King County as a whole we're

22:07 ↗ going to make the ratio even higher.

22:10 ↗ That's what our plans say cumulatively.

22:12 ↗ So that's and that's a simplistic kind

22:14 ↗ of thing. It's not meant to be an

22:16 ↗ absolute but it's just sort of a general

22:18 ↗ condition in your community. Not

22:19 ↗ everybody works and lives in their city

22:21 ↗ but that's why we broaden it out and

22:23 ↗ look at what does the surrounding region

22:24 ↗ look like. But then the other bigger and

22:27 ↗ as important thing is what's the profile

22:29 ↗ of the jobs salaries in your

22:30 ↗ communities. And so what we're trying to

22:33 ↗ show you here is that almost 40% of the

22:36 ↗ jobs in ASCO pay less than $35,000

22:38 ↗ annually. Okay. Um and what this other

22:42 ↗ chart shows you is that the income that

22:45 ↗ different kinds of jobs the top bar is a

22:48 ↗ ratio equal to 80% of median and the

22:52 ↗ lower bar is an income at 50% of median.

22:55 ↗ So what we're basically showing you here

22:57 ↗ is the first few jobs that are all

22:59 ↗ listed there have salaries below 50% of

23:01 ↗ median and the ones in the middle are

23:03 ↗ between 50 and 80 and then we have a

23:05 ↗ couple there that are just above 80% of

23:07 ↗ median. So the only point we're trying

23:08 ↗ to make here, there's a lot of jobs in

23:10 ↗ your community that are paying that are

23:12 ↗ integral part of your community that are

23:13 ↗ paying low and moderate salaries.

23:16 ↗ Illustrated by the fact how many people

23:17 ↗ are familiar with Isiqua Family Village?

23:20 ↗ Raise your hand, right? You're all

23:22 ↗ familiar with that. Everyone who moves

23:24 ↗ in there has to have an income. Their

23:26 ↗ household income has to be under 60% of

23:28 ↗ median when they move in. Some of the

23:30 ↗ people have to have incomes below 30 and

23:32 ↗ even 50% of median. Look at where they

23:35 ↗ work in your community. That's what the

23:37 ↗ chart this chart over here is showing

23:39 ↗ you. They just did a survey of some of

23:41 ↗ the residents to show you where they

23:43 ↗ they're not unemployed. This is where

23:45 ↗ they're working in your community. So

23:48 ↗ that's sort of the connection of types

23:50 ↗ of jobs in your community. So going back

23:52 ↗ to this matrix, you know, it's sort of

23:54 ↗ this thing here. And a lot of your

23:56 ↗ workforce have jobs that are low and

23:57 ↗ moderate paying. So what are the

24:00 ↗ implications to your households because

24:01 ↗ people are living here? Well, one of the

24:04 ↗ first implications of some of these

24:05 ↗ trends you see is what's being called

24:07 ↗ costburdened households. And this is

24:09 ↗ when people pay more than that 30%

24:11 ↗ figure. And what's probably even more

24:13 ↗ significant is a term called severely

24:16 ↗ costburden. And that's when people pay

24:18 ↗ more than 50%. So if 30% to stretch,

24:22 ↗ what does it mean when you're paying

24:23 ↗ more than 50% of your income for living?

24:26 ↗ Um, and I'll let you guys sort of think

24:28 ↗ about that. What we've seen is that

24:30 ↗ almost 40% of renters are costbururden.

24:34 ↗ And what's been really intriguing is is

24:36 ↗ that in the last 10 or 15 years, we've

24:38 ↗ seen a significant increase in severely

24:40 ↗ costburden renters in our East King

24:42 ↗ County community. And you and Isiqua in

24:44 ↗ particular went from 13 to 21%. And what

24:48 ↗ the graphic is trying to show you is

24:50 ↗ when you break it down by income level

24:52 ↗ that basically if you're under 50% of

24:55 ↗ median income, you got an 80% chance

24:57 ↗ you're going to be cost burdened and

24:58 ↗ most of you will be severely costburden

25:01 ↗ and they're in your community. Okay? In

25:03 ↗ other words, 21% of the renters in your

25:06 ↗ community living here now are severely

25:09 ↗ costburdened. That's what people do.

25:10 ↗ They just pay more of their income to

25:12 ↗ live. They don't necessarily always

25:14 ↗ move. They do things along that line.

25:18 ↗ Another trend is homelessness. Probably

25:20 ↗ some of you have heard this. There's

25:21 ↗ lots of different statistics, but one of

25:23 ↗ them is there. How many homeless school

25:25 ↗ children do we have in East King County?

25:27 ↗ And this shows it by district. And I

25:28 ↗ shaded Isiqua. So Isiqua has over a

25:31 ↗ hundred children in the school district

25:33 ↗ who are homeless. And that can mean

25:35 ↗ either they're doubled up or they're in

25:37 ↗ shelter. As you see, we've broken it all

25:39 ↗ out here for you. And other school

25:41 ↗ districts on the east side. So

25:42 ↗ cumulatively there's over 800 kids in

25:44 ↗ the East King County School Districts

25:46 ↗ who are homeless.

25:50 ↗ So this goes back to that earlier slide

25:53 ↗ where one of the things we look at on

25:56 ↗ sort of a cumulative level is when you

25:58 ↗ look at King County as a whole and your

26:00 ↗ salary profile in Isiqua is similar to

26:03 ↗ the salary profile of King County as a

26:05 ↗ whole. In fact, if anything, your

26:08 ↗ salaries are low a little bit lower when

26:10 ↗ you look at the cross-section of how

26:12 ↗ many are earning under like 30,000, how

26:14 ↗ many between 30 and 50, your percentages

26:16 ↗ are slightly different, slightly lower

26:18 ↗ than they are countywide. But what we're

26:21 ↗ showing here is when you look at

26:22 ↗ households cumulatively in King County,

26:26 ↗ you have 12% of households are are under

26:28 ↗ 30% of median, 12% are between 30 and

26:31 ↗ 50, and another 16% are earning between

26:34 ↗ 50 and 80.

26:36 ↗ I've been doing this a long time. This

26:38 ↗ is not a new cross-section.

26:41 ↗ This is about what we've always been.

26:43 ↗ This is what our economy creates. If we

26:45 ↗ grow, there's a good chance that your

26:48 ↗ growth from jobs, etc. will have an

26:51 ↗ income profile similar to what you see

26:53 ↗ here. Now, what the yellow, the middle

26:57 ↗ bar,

27:00 ↗ and the green bar are showing you is how

27:02 ↗ much housing is affordable. what

27:05 ↗ percentage of our housing stock is

27:06 ↗ affordable at each of those levels. The

27:08 ↗ yellow bar, the middle one is in King

27:11 ↗ County as a whole and the green one is

27:14 ↗ isqua.

27:15 ↗ You're not alone. Most of the cities I

27:17 ↗ work for have very similarly shaped

27:19 ↗ graphics when you put this slide up on

27:21 ↗ the wall. That's the situation in East

27:24 ↗ King County has been for some time. Um,

27:29 ↗ this is another illustration is what's

27:31 ↗ been going on with rents in our

27:33 ↗ community. And again, I've been tracking

27:35 ↗ rents for a long time. And this graphic

27:37 ↗ shows you a rent over time of what's

27:40 ↗ affordable at 80% of median, what is

27:43 ↗ affordable at 50% of median, and then

27:46 ↗ what have rents been historically in

27:48 ↗ East King County as a whole, at least

27:50 ↗ since 2000,

27:53 ↗ and what have they been in Isiqua since

27:55 ↗ 2000.

27:57 ↗ What stands out to somebody who looks at

28:00 ↗ this chart?

28:01 ↗ The discrepancy

28:03 ↗ between

28:06 ↗ what's

28:08 ↗ what the average rents are in Isiqua and

28:12 ↗ what's affordable for people at those

28:16 ↗ two levels. Okay. Particularly in recent

28:19 ↗ years. Anything else? Okay. Any Yes.

28:21 ↗ Incomes aren't keeping up with rent,

28:23 ↗ right?

28:25 ↗ Okay. What else? There's one other thing

28:27 ↗ in this graphic that's a little

28:30 ↗ different for especially the last few

28:32 ↗ years.

28:35 ↗ The steepness of the curve. For those of

28:37 ↗ you who do math and statistics and

28:39 ↗ stuff, steep curve means a lot of change

28:41 ↗ fast. Okay. What is the scary thing to

28:44 ↗ me is we have seen trends where rents go

28:46 ↗ up and rents go down and rents go up and

28:49 ↗ rents go down. And if they did King

28:52 ↗ County, and this has been true since

28:53 ↗ I've been here since since 90, the King

28:56 ↗ County overall number would be like

28:58 ↗ following my arrow. East King County

29:00 ↗ rents have always been higher than

29:02 ↗ countywide. That's been going on for 25

29:04 ↗ plus for forever, but

29:08 ↗ they never went across the 80%

29:10 ↗ threshold. And whether or not we're

29:12 ↗ going to have a correction like we saw

29:14 ↗ here may or may not um because the

29:18 ↗ income profile is the same that we've

29:19 ↗ had in the past. But this is a trend

29:22 ↗ that I haven't experienced in 25 years

29:25 ↗ and that's a flag. Whether or not we

29:26 ↗ might correct, I don't know. But right

29:28 ↗ now, that's something we haven't seen

29:30 ↗ before. Is average rents above 80%

29:33 ↗ affordable at above 80% immediate.

29:37 ↗ So now, and I'm going to keep this

29:40 ↗ because we might need it later. So now I

29:41 ↗ got another chart I want to do with you.

29:44 ↗ And this other chart is so what do

29:47 ↗ cities do about this? Okay.

29:50 ↗ So now another sort of general

29:52 ↗ conversation

29:54 ↗ about what affects the housing that's

29:56 ↗ put on the ground in our community.

29:59 ↗ Okay. So who are the players that impact

30:03 ↗ the form, the price, the location, etc.

30:06 ↗ of housing in our community.

30:09 ↗ The first one I'll put is the land

30:11 ↗ owner. Okay? They want a certain price

30:14 ↗ for their land. So the first player is a

30:16 ↗ land owner.

30:19 ↗ They impact what goes on with housing.

30:23 ↗ Another one is the developer.

30:30 ↗ That's the one who actually comes in and

30:31 ↗ builds something.

30:33 ↗ Okay, I'm going to open it up. What

30:35 ↗ other players out there impact the

30:37 ↗ housing in our community?

30:40 ↗ Employers.

30:41 ↗ Employers. And what? Say a little bit

30:44 ↗ more.

30:50 ↗ some

30:53 ↗ you know when when they offer good jobs

30:56 ↗ then people want to move closer okay and

30:59 ↗ you know increase uh

31:01 ↗ okay right the services they have okay

31:04 ↗ very good okay that's good one others

31:08 ↗ transportation

31:10 ↗ okay I'm not going to put that's you

31:12 ↗ know that's not a bad one I wasn't one

31:14 ↗ that I was originally thinking know, but

31:16 ↗ I'm going to put it on because it does

31:18 ↗ you're it does have an impact. I call it

31:22 ↗ more of an indirect impact.

31:25 ↗ Real estate agents and real estate

31:27 ↗ agents. Okay. Real estate agents have an

31:30 ↗ impact.

31:32 ↗ Schools. Hm. Schools. Um that impacts

31:37 ↗ demand. So, I'm going to put that down

31:38 ↗ there like with transportation.

31:47 ↗ What else? Who else is kind of impacts

31:51 ↗ what that house looks like? The city

31:54 ↗ zoning city regulations, right? Land use

31:57 ↗ regulations

31:59 ↗ has a big impact.

32:02 ↗ All right. And I didn't say city and

32:03 ↗ there's a reason why. You'll find out in

32:05 ↗ a couple minutes. But say, okay, land

32:08 ↗ use regulations.

32:10 ↗ All right. Others? Banks. Hm. Banks.

32:13 ↗ Banks. I just I'm going to put

32:16 ↗ financing. Financing. Financing. Okay.

32:19 ↗ There's reasons I'm using some of the

32:20 ↗ terminology I'm using here. And you'll

32:22 ↗ again, like I said, see in a minute.

32:24 ↗ Financing. Okay. Who else? Permitting.

32:28 ↗ Okay. Land use and slashpermitting. Yep.

32:32 ↗ But that's they are different and

32:33 ↗ they're both important. So, they both

32:36 ↗ need to be acknowledged

32:37 ↗ especially for the work you'll be doing.

32:40 ↗ Okay. Who else?

32:44 ↗ What the house or homes or whatever it

32:47 ↗ look like? The builder, architect, the

32:49 ↗ architect, the designers. Okay.

32:54 ↗ All right. Who else?

33:00 ↗ Uh, government fees and taxes. Okay. I'm

33:04 ↗ going to put that under

33:06 ↗ What would I put that under? Sure, I'll

33:08 ↗ put that. All right, we'll put in we'll

33:11 ↗ put fees. Okay,

33:16 ↗ public fees. Okay, what else? There's a

33:19 ↗ couple other players that were in my

33:20 ↗ mind. Construction market, general

33:23 ↗ contractors. Okay, so there you have the

33:25 ↗ builder. So, I'm going to put the

33:27 ↗ developer and actually, you know, the

33:29 ↗ builder is separate from the developer

33:31 ↗ and they can have an impact. Okay,

33:34 ↗ there's a couple other players. City

33:36 ↗ council. H city council. Um, no, I'm not

33:40 ↗ going to say council. I'm gonna put them

33:42 ↗ under land use regulation city, but

33:44 ↗ you're getting a little closer.

33:48 ↗ There's two main players that we haven't

33:50 ↗ talked about yet. Uh, state. Nope. Well,

33:54 ↗ yeah. I mean, yes. The market. Thank

33:56 ↗ you. The people are going to live in the

33:58 ↗ housing. The owners. Yeah. Right. The

34:00 ↗ buy the restorers. I'm going to call

34:02 ↗ them the res. But now take that same

34:04 ↗ concept and twist it a little

34:07 ↗ differently.

34:10 ↗ There's very similar but twisted. The

34:13 ↗ renter, the neighbors.

34:16 ↗ Okay. Neighbors have often a huge impact

34:20 ↗ because they provide input that affects

34:23 ↗ what councils are willing to do. In my

34:27 ↗ life, neighbors have been a huge impact

34:30 ↗ on what I do. Okay. So, neighbors. So,

34:33 ↗ that's a pretty full list, right?

34:35 ↗ There's probably a couple more, but that

34:37 ↗ gives you an idea. All of these things

34:40 ↗ affect housing. Now, most people I often

34:43 ↗ hear say, "Oh, government should get

34:45 ↗ involved with housing." And when you

34:47 ↗ hear a statement like that, what are

34:48 ↗ they probably talking about? They're

34:51 ↗ probably talking about public housing,

34:54 ↗ big huge public housing projects.

34:57 ↗ They're bad. They were bad. They had

34:58 ↗ crime. They had this. They had that. And

35:01 ↗ the point I'm just trying to point out

35:02 ↗ is in those kinds of developments and so

35:05 ↗ people say because that went bad,

35:07 ↗ government's not good in housing. We're

35:09 ↗ a private market system to build

35:10 ↗ housing. Our our country relies mostly

35:12 ↗ on the private market. But the comment I

35:15 ↗ would make is in public housing

35:18 ↗ that probably the government, the public

35:21 ↗ was the land owner, the developer, the

35:24 ↗ designer. Oh, I forgot one. A big huge

35:27 ↗ one. Property manager.

35:29 ↗ Okay. So you have property manager.

35:31 ↗ Sorry, I knew there was one I was

35:32 ↗ forgetting.

35:34 ↗ And the government

35:37 ↗ played all of these roles.

35:40 ↗ They pretty much did a lot of these.

35:44 ↗ Okay. And what's changed a lot in the

35:47 ↗ last 20 years is that maybe government

35:52 ↗ still has a role but not quite the same.

35:54 ↗ That they can pick and choose in which

35:56 ↗ areas. are always you know land use

35:57 ↗ regulation that's the most obvious but

36:00 ↗ as you'll see in some of the strategies

36:01 ↗ I can just go through quickly government

36:03 ↗ can sort of pick and choose how they can

36:05 ↗ interject or involve in order to allow

36:08 ↗ the market to do its thing and sometimes

36:10 ↗ they just make it so the market can do

36:12 ↗ it on its own and other times they sort

36:14 ↗ of go we're going to help steer the

36:16 ↗ market but we're still not going to be

36:17 ↗ the managers but that's something to

36:19 ↗ think about is different ways government

36:22 ↗ can help shape these players in order to

36:25 ↗ create back to here the housing market

36:31 ↗ variety of needs and we rely primarily

36:34 ↗ we're a system that relies on the

36:35 ↗ private market. So trying to blend those

36:38 ↗ two things together is when you start

36:40 ↗ thinking about a plan and how to go

36:42 ↗ about doing a plan and where the city

36:43 ↗ interjects. So that's just sort of big

36:45 ↗ picture thinking as we move forward um

36:48 ↗ how to do it. So just examples of

36:49 ↗ strategies that cities have used and

36:52 ↗ you've used over the years. just a

36:53 ↗ couple real quick and we're going to

36:55 ↗ talk about this more in other meetings,

36:56 ↗ but things like accessory dwelling

36:58 ↗ units, allowing people to build small

37:00 ↗ apartments in their homes. Um, you've

37:02 ↗ done that. Um, other cities in East King

37:05 ↗ County have done that. The next example

37:07 ↗ here is where cities will say I have

37:12 ↗ um we're going to change the zoning and

37:15 ↗ as a result of changing that zoning

37:17 ↗ we're going to ask tell request demand

37:21 ↗ the p the private builders to include

37:23 ↗ some housing at certain price points.

37:25 ↗ You have that up in Isqua Highlands. You

37:27 ↗ have it in the development agreement

37:29 ↗ that Christy was referring to. They have

37:31 ↗ it in other agreements. you have it in

37:32 ↗ your central Isco plan and other cities

37:34 ↗ in East County have been doing the same

37:35 ↗ thing. We're going to allow you to build

37:37 ↗ more. We want to capture some public

37:39 ↗ benefit out of doing that. We're going

37:40 ↗ to target it to certain needs. Other

37:43 ↗ times, it's just allowing the market to

37:46 ↗ be able to be more flexible to respond

37:49 ↗ to this circumstance.

37:52 ↗ Do you let the market decide? The

37:54 ↗ example I gave in Redmond, a builder

37:56 ↗ said, "I can build these really small

37:57 ↗ units and they will fill up and it will

37:59 ↗ meet a need." city had to do some stuff

38:01 ↗ with its code to make that product work.

38:04 ↗ Okay. So, that's another example of

38:06 ↗ doing that. Parking requirements. A lot

38:08 ↗ of cities are looking at that and I know

38:09 ↗ that's going to be an issue you're going

38:10 ↗ to talk about. What's the balance for

38:12 ↗ parking? Um because especially more and

38:14 ↗ more so it's becoming an expensive cost.

38:16 ↗ So, the builders say we want to do less.

38:18 ↗ You got transit. Do you need as much?

38:20 ↗ And others saying wait a minute, we

38:21 ↗ don't want spillover parking. Um so

38:23 ↗ there's a variety of types of things you

38:25 ↗ can do with your land use regulations

38:26 ↗ that are listed here. Another example

38:29 ↗ is, and I don't have anything listed for

38:31 ↗ Isiqua, is some cities now exempt

38:33 ↗ property taxes for a period of time on

38:35 ↗ buildings in exchange for some of the

38:37 ↗ units being affordable. So, they're

38:39 ↗ playing basically the fees and financer

38:42 ↗ financing piece that I had listed here,

38:45 ↗ right? They're saying we can do that,

38:48 ↗ but it's still going to be a private

38:49 ↗ developer. It's still going to be a

38:50 ↗ mark, you know, most of the project

38:51 ↗ market rate, but some portion of the

38:53 ↗ units will still be privately managed

38:54 ↗ just like all the others. But we can use

38:56 ↗ a financing tool in order to help the

38:59 ↗ private market meet a need that we've

39:01 ↗ identified. When cities do that, they'll

39:03 ↗ say this is the need we want. This is a

39:06 ↗ gap we see in the city and that's where

39:07 ↗ we want to go. Same thing with impact

39:09 ↗ fees. Sometime, you know, that was on

39:11 ↗ the list here, fees. Some cities will

39:13 ↗ wave the fees. you've done that quite a

39:15 ↗ bit up in Isqua Highlands and other

39:16 ↗ areas when projects meet certain

39:18 ↗ affordability requirements.

39:21 ↗ Um these are all let's see then the

39:24 ↗ other is the city of Isiqua combined

39:26 ↗ with other cities have actually put up

39:28 ↗ money and then that money gets shared by

39:30 ↗ cities to directly assist housing that

39:32 ↗ will be affordable. Usually those

39:34 ↗ projects are then going after state

39:35 ↗ money, federal money, county money, and

39:38 ↗ that's where we are able to get to much

39:40 ↗ lower income levels and serve people in

39:41 ↗ the 50% to 30% level. So that's

39:44 ↗ something that has been uniquely done in

39:46 ↗ East King County where sh cities share

39:48 ↗ their funds and and move them around.

39:52 ↗ And then sometimes when we do it, we

39:54 ↗ specifically are looking for people who

39:55 ↗ are going to provide housing that meets

39:58 ↗ people with special needs. Many of you

39:59 ↗ probably know of Leo House in town.

40:01 ↗ Serves people with disabilities. Um, we

40:03 ↗ have several groups on the east side who

40:05 ↗ are serving homeless households. You did

40:07 ↗ something with Compassion House where

40:08 ↗ the city donated a house and somebody

40:10 ↗ donated a piece of land and people vote

40:12 ↗ donated labor and that became a house

40:14 ↗ for people who are homeless. Um, so

40:16 ↗ sometimes you're combining private and

40:18 ↗ public resources um in order to make

40:20 ↗ special needs housing happen. And then

40:23 ↗ sometimes you supported through the

40:24 ↗ trust fund homeless housing in your

40:26 ↗ neighboring cities. Belleview and and uh

40:28 ↗ Belleview has some um in projects in

40:31 ↗ their community. and as does other

40:33 ↗ cities on the east side.

40:35 ↗ So in the past using the tools that we

40:40 ↗ have at our disposal um they generally

40:42 ↗ fall into three categories. One is when

40:45 ↗ you the purple bar I show here is when

40:48 ↗ just by allowing the market to build

40:50 ↗ more diverse forms of housing they on

40:53 ↗ their own create housing that is at a

40:55 ↗ lower price point than it might

40:56 ↗ otherwise you know by allowing multif

40:58 ↗ family housing by allowing things along

41:00 ↗ those lines. The second is the green

41:02 ↗ section which is direct indirect or the

41:04 ↗ the uh land use provisions. That's where

41:07 ↗ you say we let you build more you do

41:09 ↗ affordability but you have to do a

41:12 ↗ certain amount of affordability and

41:13 ↗ we're going to covenant it to make sure

41:14 ↗ it stays affordable over time. Um

41:17 ↗ accessory dwelling units we also put in

41:19 ↗ that category because they almost are

41:20 ↗ always affordable in the moderate income

41:22 ↗ range. And then the the light blue is

41:25 ↗ looking at um when the direct assistance

41:28 ↗ donating land is another way cities have

41:30 ↗ done direct assistance general fund

41:32 ↗ dollars. What this is showing you is

41:34 ↗ that when we try to help the 50% and

41:36 ↗ below, we almost always need to have

41:39 ↗ direct assistance. We can't just use the

41:41 ↗ market or those land use tools to get to

41:43 ↗ that affordability level. It's really

41:44 ↗ hard. A couple times we have, but not

41:46 ↗ often. It takes that extra direct

41:49 ↗ assistance because of the income level

41:50 ↗ and the rents people can afford versus

41:52 ↗ the cost of creating that housing. And

41:55 ↗ but when we do moderate income, all of

41:57 ↗ these tools have worked that all these

41:59 ↗ different things of trying to get other

42:00 ↗ players involved can help create

42:02 ↗ diversity of housing and affordability

42:04 ↗ in your community. What this graph is

42:06 ↗ also showing you is we had some goals in

42:09 ↗ the original set of plans that said our

42:11 ↗ goal would be to build 445 affordable

42:15 ↗ units to low income every year. We hit

42:18 ↗ about 22% of that number in that first

42:21 ↗ 20 years of Arthur's existence. We

42:24 ↗ managed to get around 80% of the goal or

42:27 ↗ even higher for moderate income but with

42:30 ↗ a couple caveats. one and that was

42:33 ↗ because we used all those different

42:34 ↗ tools and for Isiqua your numbers look

42:37 ↗ very very similar you got about within

42:40 ↗ Isiqua through your efforts you were

42:42 ↗ right around 23 24% of your low-inccome

42:44 ↗ goal and you were right about 90% for

42:47 ↗ moderate income what was different about

42:49 ↗ you is you got more of your moderate

42:51 ↗ through all those land use requirements

42:52 ↗ up in the in the MP in the master plan

42:54 ↗ developments you got a lot through that

42:57 ↗ um the other is is that most of the

43:00 ↗ stuff in moderate is rental housing

43:02 ↗ not much of its ownership. You do have

43:04 ↗ some ownership and so therefore you

43:08 ↗ might not be you have it technically in

43:11 ↗ the categories that are moderate but

43:13 ↗ it's not necessarily spread across the

43:15 ↗ board of all these different needs we

43:17 ↗ talked about in terms of rental and

43:19 ↗ ownership or larger units versus more

43:21 ↗ more smaller units especially for the

43:23 ↗ market. The market rate units affordable

43:25 ↗ to moderate income are usually smaller

43:27 ↗ units that are built and this is new

43:29 ↗ production. This isn't existing. Okay.

43:34 ↗ And so finally, this is the report card

43:35 ↗ that staff does. And this is now going

43:37 ↗ back to that countywide need, which is

43:40 ↗ saying if we had a perfect world, every

43:42 ↗ city would have 12% of its housing

43:44 ↗ affordable to very low income, 12% to uh

43:47 ↗ low income, 30 to 50% of median, and 16%

43:50 ↗ to moderate. And what this is showing

43:52 ↗ you is the city's at about when you look

43:54 ↗ at all housing, both the new and

43:55 ↗ existing, you're at about 3% 3% and 15%.

44:00 ↗ Okay. Um, and then what I showed you on

44:03 ↗ the bottom is the thing I just explained

44:04 ↗ on the previous slide. This is what you

44:06 ↗ did relative to your growth. And if you

44:09 ↗ had done 24% of your growth, you would

44:11 ↗ have been at 815 and you got about 24%

44:15 ↗ of that number. You got 191. So this is

44:19 ↗ just different ways of thinking about

44:20 ↗ what have you accomplished over time and

44:22 ↗ where do you look at today. And then my

44:24 ↗ final two thoughts, and this is actually

44:26 ↗ a slide that I think um you saw from

44:28 ↗ Trish, is this is the beginning of the

44:31 ↗ matchup between here and here. What is

44:35 ↗ your mix in terms of tenure? You've got

44:37 ↗ condos, town homes, and apartments. And

44:40 ↗ then what's their mix in terms of size

44:42 ↗ of units? And uh Trish already made some

44:44 ↗ comments and observations from that, so

44:46 ↗ I won't repeat those.

44:48 ↗ And then finally is you have a certain

44:53 ↗ profile of housing today which is what

44:56 ↗ the first column is. The second column

44:58 ↗ is saying what is the potential profile

45:00 ↗ based on existing zoning. So that's

45:02 ↗ saying that you can get about another

45:04 ↗ 375

45:06 ↗ or so single family homes and the rest

45:09 ↗ would be you have some like low mid-rise

45:12 ↗ or low uh medium density town homes and

45:15 ↗ then the vast majority in terms of your

45:17 ↗ capacity under zoning is that sort of

45:19 ↗ the four three to five story woodframe

45:22 ↗ type buildings and and then so you can

45:25 ↗ see well that's what we have today. This

45:27 ↗ is what our projection would be. What

45:29 ↗ does it look like when you put it all

45:30 ↗ together? And that's what the last

45:32 ↗ column is. Um, and so whether or not the

45:34 ↗ mix will be, this is showing no condos.

45:37 ↗ That's because right now, the last few

45:38 ↗ years, the market hasn't been building

45:40 ↗ condos. Will that change in the next 20

45:42 ↗ years? We don't know. But right now,

45:44 ↗ there's constraints to people building

45:45 ↗ condos. So they're saying it may be

45:47 ↗ primarily rental is what they're

45:49 ↗ implying. Um, I've seen market shifts

45:52 ↗ where sometimes it's all rental, then it

45:53 ↗ goes condos and back and forth, but

45:55 ↗ there are some constraints to that. So

45:57 ↗ this is just sort of general overview of

46:00 ↗ different ways of thinking about housing

46:02 ↗ as you move forward on your overall

46:03 ↗ strategy plan.

46:17 ↗ Any comments or questions or thoughts

46:19 ↗ initially?

46:21 ↗ Why would condos be under pressure?

46:23 ↗ Because I would expect as real estate

46:24 ↗ prices go up, your demand for lower

46:31 ↗ cost housing would go higher. Therefore,

46:34 ↗ condos would be the first thing I would

46:36 ↗ see increase, right? It should be

46:39 ↗ happening now. There's two there's a

46:41 ↗ couple different Well, anyone have any

46:43 ↗ ideas why we're not seeing condos built

46:46 ↗ right now? There's a couple potential

46:49 ↗ reasons. A lot of people don't want high

46:50 ↗ density, but I think the high density is

46:53 ↗ already being planned. It just hasn't

46:54 ↗ been built yet. Well, what I also, if

46:57 ↗ you look at that previous slide, you'll

46:58 ↗ see or that slide we had, a lot of

47:00 ↗ condos were built. A lot. In fact, we

47:03 ↗ were seeing about 30% or more of the

47:05 ↗ multif family housing built before the

47:07 ↗ recession were condominiums.

47:09 ↗ So, there was a market acceptance for

47:11 ↗ condominiums. So there, that's why I'm

47:14 ↗ saying it's strange that we're, you

47:15 ↗ know, from a market point of view, from

47:17 ↗ looking at this, everything says condos

47:20 ↗ should be on the rise. Okay, they should

47:22 ↗ be. And we are seeing very high-end

47:25 ↗ condos being built, but we're not seeing

47:27 ↗ the mid and lower price condos being

47:29 ↗ built. And there's potentially two

47:31 ↗ reasons why. There's three reasons why,

47:32 ↗ actually. Is that because the real

47:34 ↗ estate when during the real estate boom,

47:36 ↗ the condos took the hardest hit and

47:38 ↗ therefore people don't it's more

47:40 ↗ volatile? That's very close. people who

47:42 ↗ bought those are nervous about buy I'm

47:44 ↗ sorry are nervous about buying.

47:47 ↗ The millennials haven't gotten back on

47:49 ↗ the home ownership market yet because

47:51 ↗ they watched what happened. That's one

47:52 ↗ of the theories that's out there is that

47:54 ↗ they prefer the flexibility and not you

47:59 ↗ know what if there's another housing

48:00 ↗ bust. They don't want to go through

48:01 ↗ that. So that's one of the ideas that's

48:03 ↗ out there is that the market's a little

48:05 ↗ reluctant. the younger market's a little

48:07 ↗ re reluctant at this point in time to

48:09 ↗ get back into ownership um kind of

48:12 ↗ thing. So that's one of the theories. Do

48:14 ↗ people who want to own not want to be

48:17 ↗ part of homeowner associations where the

48:19 ↗ fees are going to go up? No, because

48:21 ↗ condos are out there. There's a lot of

48:24 ↗ condos were built and were filled and

48:26 ↗ we're doing fine. You know, they're out

48:27 ↗ there. So I can't I would say maybe but

48:30 ↗ that we didn't have that before. Were

48:32 ↗ you gonna Yes. you made reference to the

48:36 ↗ uh the impact um well the the regional

48:38 ↗ impact of our neighbors in Belleview and

48:40 ↗ how uh the the housing decisions and

48:43 ↗ marketplace there impacts us and vice

48:45 ↗ versa. I'm thinking larger for a second.

48:47 ↗ What uh what are we dealing with in

48:49 ↗ terms of you know neighbors to the

48:51 ↗ northwest the issues in BC? There's, you

48:54 ↗ know, there's new stories about dollars

48:55 ↗ coming from overseas and buying downtown

48:57 ↗ Seattle. Now, um some of those things,

49:00 ↗ how does that play in or not play in?

49:02 ↗ Maybe. Has anyone heard about how that's

49:04 ↗ impacting East King County?

49:07 ↗ I don't know if it's landed in Isiqua.

49:08 ↗ It sure has landed in Belleview. They

49:11 ↗ buy the homes. They're not they might

49:12 ↗ buy condos, but they're buying homes.

49:14 ↗ foreign money is b increasingly buying

49:16 ↗ single family homes in our market area.

49:18 ↗ So that's one thing we've seen. So the

49:20 ↗ other is a more subtle is that there's

49:23 ↗ liability issues with building condos

49:25 ↗ that are different and it's too much

49:27 ↗ risk. So we're still seeing high-end

49:29 ↗ condos built because there the margins

49:31 ↗ are enough that they can deal with that

49:33 ↗ issue and stuff. And they're also using

49:35 ↗ non-wood frame construction. Um, and so

49:37 ↗ liability has been one of the things

49:39 ↗ we've heard from the building industry

49:40 ↗ is it's too much risk for them in order

49:44 ↗ to go into that market. And then the

49:45 ↗ third reason is with low interest rates

49:47 ↗ and cap rates where they are, the

49:49 ↗ economics of multif family rental are

49:51 ↗ working as well as they've ever worked

49:53 ↗ for people who are developing. So you're

49:54 ↗ normally right. Your point was right on

49:57 ↗ to say, gee, you would think condos

50:00 ↗ would be able to outbid or whatever the

50:02 ↗ land for uh over rental. And that's

50:04 ↗ exactly what was happening in the early

50:06 ↗ 2000s. Um, is that renter developers

50:09 ↗ couldn't compete on the land price, but

50:11 ↗ right now because of low interest rates

50:12 ↗ and everything like that, they're on it

50:15 ↗ on a more of a par from sort of the

50:16 ↗ investor point of view. So that's so

50:19 ↗ those are three different there might be

50:20 ↗ others, but those give you some of the

50:22 ↗ things that are out there. Um, and so as

50:25 ↗ a result, we're having an area that was

50:27 ↗ being served. Um because the average

50:29 ↗ size condo that's been built in the LA,

50:32 ↗ you know, that was built in the early

50:34 ↗ 2000s is probably as large as the

50:36 ↗ average single family home built in the

50:37 ↗ 50s and early 60s

50:40 ↗ because homes used to be really small

50:41 ↗ when they were built. They were under

50:42 ↗ 1,000 square feet. So in terms of living

50:46 ↗ square footage, a condo isn't all that

50:47 ↗ different than all those small homes we

50:49 ↗ were building um in the general market

50:51 ↗ in the 50s and 60s. So it's sort of like

50:54 ↗ they've become a new form of, you know,

50:56 ↗ but they're serving a similar need.

50:59 ↗ So

51:02 ↗ great. All right. Lots of good

51:04 ↗ information and it really helps to

51:05 ↗ provide a broader context because as we

51:07 ↗ as we know we are in a within a region.

51:10 ↗ Um so uh I'm here tonight to talk a

51:12 ↗ little bit about the housing strategy

51:15 ↗ and the and the process for the public

51:17 ↗ outreach we're we're doing. So, one of

51:19 ↗ the things the key things we're doing is

51:21 ↗ to hold some uh focus groups and to talk

51:24 ↗ to individually because obviously this

51:25 ↗ is a really this is you know all these

51:27 ↗ questions you kind of start seeing the

51:28 ↗ data and you start thinking about it. Um

51:30 ↗ we so we know that we want to hear the

51:32 ↗ different voices in our community and so

51:34 ↗ we decided to do focus groups and here's

51:36 ↗ a list of the focus uh groups that we

51:38 ↗ plan on doing um at the end of for from

51:41 ↗ now until the end of the year. Um we

51:43 ↗ have conducted three focus groups so far

51:46 ↗ for the businesses and school district

51:47 ↗ and the rest will happen after this

51:49 ↗ meeting and I'll talk a little bit more

51:51 ↗ about that later. We plan having this is

51:53 ↗ our first of our uh joint three

51:56 ↗ commission meetings and we'll have

51:57 ↗ another one in the beginning of next

51:59 ↗ year in about February January February

52:02 ↗ to come together provide the information

52:04 ↗ that we've heard so far and get your

52:06 ↗ feedback and input. Then we plan on

52:09 ↗ doing some neighborhood outreach. And so

52:10 ↗ those are going to be broader

52:12 ↗ communities for the community to come in

52:14 ↗ and listen to the things that we've

52:15 ↗ heard from the focus group. We plan on

52:17 ↗ developing some themes to test out with

52:20 ↗ the community and see are these things

52:22 ↗ um themes that you feel are a good fit,

52:24 ↗ the things we should be addressing in

52:26 ↗ our housing strategy. And then we'll

52:28 ↗ also do an online survey. Again,

52:30 ↗ realizing there's multiple ways to to

52:32 ↗ get input in from our community. So,

52:34 ↗ anybody can go, employees, employers,

52:37 ↗ visitors, residents, um, can go in and,

52:41 ↗ uh, complete the online survey when we

52:43 ↗ have that point. So, you guys are on the

52:44 ↗ ground floor of what we're doing here

52:46 ↗ for this housing strategy. So, as we go

52:49 ↗ along, don't be shy about saying, "I

52:51 ↗ have an idea. Have you thought about

52:52 ↗ this?" Um, we're definitely looking to

52:54 ↗ move move this forward. Question,

52:58 ↗ are we able or will we be able to watch

53:02 ↗ those focus groups? Um it was horrible.

53:04 ↗ Well, we actually had a commissioner uh

53:07 ↗ each from each of the commissions were

53:09 ↗ uh invited to the focus groups. We

53:11 ↗ invited the chair to them and so um so

53:14 ↗ we'll do it that way. The focus groups

53:16 ↗ are meant to be smaller groups and we so

53:17 ↗ we don't want to videotape them or you

53:19 ↗ know we want them to feel comfortable

53:20 ↗ talking so far but definitely in the

53:23 ↗ future for the future focus groups if

53:24 ↗ you have an interest in being in one of

53:26 ↗ those feel free to let your commission

53:28 ↗ uh staff person uh know and we'll

53:30 ↗ definitely uh get you more information

53:31 ↗ about that. So I think it's helpful yeah

53:33 ↗ to hear the conversation and and really

53:35 ↗ you know you're sitting there and you're

53:36 ↗ listening and you can definitely

53:37 ↗ contribute but it's about listening and

53:39 ↗ hearing and bringing that information

53:40 ↗ back to the commission. So um so I

53:43 ↗ wanted to first let you know so um you

53:46 ↗ know I work with the economic vitality

53:47 ↗ commission and I want to give you a

53:48 ↗ little bit since we started off with the

53:50 ↗ businesses I wanted to give you a little

53:51 ↗ bit of context of what we know about our

53:53 ↗ business community so far. Um we just

53:56 ↗ conducted um a 2016 business community

54:00 ↗ survey and as one of the results of that

54:03 ↗ showed that um Isiqua is a great place

54:05 ↗ to do business, right? So we know that

54:07 ↗ Isiqua is a great place to live. We've

54:09 ↗ heard that a lot from our residents.

54:10 ↗ Businesses also um kind of have

54:13 ↗ responded back and so um we did the same

54:16 ↗ survey four years ago and as you can see

54:19 ↗ the uh positive rate has increased. So

54:23 ↗ that's great. So things are working well

54:24 ↗ for our businesses. You know, obviously

54:26 ↗ the worldwide recession is improving,

54:28 ↗ but um they are also uh liking to do

54:31 ↗ business here in Isiqua. But we did have

54:34 ↗ um we did ask them what things are

54:36 ↗ working, what things are not working.

54:37 ↗ And this is a bubble chart uh a bubble a

54:40 ↗ cloud word word cloud um obviously. So

54:43 ↗ the larger uh words, the ones that have

54:45 ↗ responded more often. So no surprise

54:48 ↗ traffic is one of the concerns that

54:50 ↗ businesses have here. Um, anybody have

54:53 ↗ any comments about any of the other

54:54 ↗ words up there that kind of surprised

54:56 ↗ them or

54:59 ↗ affordable housing is on there? And

55:00 ↗ that's one something that's new has kind

55:02 ↗ of uh increased in in our results from

55:04 ↗ the last time and I think that has a lot

55:06 ↗ to do with them being able to to attract

55:09 ↗ and retain their um workforce. Anything

55:12 ↗ in there that surprises you or is

55:14 ↗ missing? Utilities because gas prices

55:17 ↗ have gone down. So, I don't know how

55:20 ↗ utilities would be

55:23 ↗ power outages,

55:26 ↗ internet service, broadband, fiber, the

55:29 ↗ whole the whole gamut of utilities.

55:31 ↗ Yeah. Yeah. Mhm. Right. Yeah. So, um so

55:36 ↗ again, these are the Yeah. So, when you

55:40 ↗ say affordable housing recently popped

55:43 ↗ up, meaning on the previous survey, it

55:46 ↗ wasn't there. Is that what you said?

55:48 ↗ Yeah. I'm checking with our uh business

55:50 ↗ survey guru back in the back and yeah,

55:52 ↗ she's shaking her head. Yes. So, that

55:53 ↗ was a new response that that made it to

55:56 ↗ this level. Yes. But looking at the size

56:00 ↗ of the text, then I can see that it's

56:02 ↗ maybe very low on the list.

56:07 ↗ It's at the lower end, but it's not

56:09 ↗ like, you know, one or two responses.

56:11 ↗ And actually, if Andrea wants to chime

56:13 ↗ in, there's a microphone right there.

56:15 ↗ You can repeat this for me. You can

56:17 ↗ right there. Affordable housing came up

56:19 ↗ in other ways and we Great. Thank you.

56:23 ↗ Affordable housing came up in other

56:25 ↗ conversations too with the businesses

56:28 ↗ when asking about uh recruiting a

56:30 ↗ workforce and what they saw their

56:32 ↗ challenges were in terms of workforce

56:33 ↗ availability. They cited affordable

56:36 ↗ housing to be a concern because a lot of

56:39 ↗ uh most of their employees couldn't

56:40 ↗ afford to live in Isiqua and that was a

56:43 ↗ barrier to them for accessing talent.

56:46 ↗ Um, so we did hear about affordable

56:48 ↗ housing in a couple different ways from

56:49 ↗ businesses and overwhelmingly much more

56:52 ↗ so than in 2012.

56:56 ↗ Okay. And just to add on to that, would

56:59 ↗ it be safe to assume

57:01 ↗ that

57:03 ↗ regarding the retention comment or

57:06 ↗ turnover comment is because it's traffic

57:10 ↗ too hard to get in here? Is that a safe

57:13 ↗ assumption? That's yes. Okay, that's

57:16 ↗ part of it. Yes. And so, um, and we'll

57:19 ↗ be talking about that what we've heard

57:20 ↗ in actually in the focus groups in a

57:23 ↗ minute. So, yeah. And the

57:26 ↗ distance from Seattle, um,

57:31 ↗ was that at all related to the

57:34 ↗ differential in uh, pay scale?

57:38 ↗ I don't think so. No. Okay. Yeah.

57:42 ↗ So then the uh looking at what the the

57:44 ↗ businesses really liked about Isiqua and

57:46 ↗ if you look at this it's really pretty

57:48 ↗ much what residents also like correct.

57:50 ↗ So you have you talk about the natural

57:52 ↗ beauty the quality of life accessibility

57:55 ↗ the close-knit uh community historic

57:58 ↗ downtown. So so our business owners and

58:01 ↗ employee employees are very much um in

58:04 ↗ line with what why residents um like to

58:07 ↗ be here.

58:09 ↗ So knowing that we um we sat down and we

58:12 ↗ had three focus groups um in the in this

58:14 ↗ actually in the last three days and we

58:18 ↗ uh met with large employers in one

58:20 ↗ group. We met with um some small

58:21 ↗ businesses and the chamber and the

58:23 ↗ downtown is association in the next one

58:26 ↗ and then we also sat with sat down with

58:27 ↗ the school district in the third. And

58:30 ↗ we're just kind of digesting that

58:31 ↗ information now. But um uh these are the

58:34 ↗ general themes that we've heard in these

58:36 ↗ in these um focus groups. And I want I

58:39 ↗ want to encourage any of the

58:40 ↗ commissioners that have sat in those

58:42 ↗ focus groups to chime in anytime they

58:45 ↗ like uh along the way. So basically um

58:48 ↗ one of the first one was about the

58:50 ↗ affordability concerns and ownership and

58:52 ↗ rental. And so I think um we all know it

58:56 ↗ may be challenging to purchase a home

58:58 ↗ here in Isiqua and we may have heard

59:01 ↗ that it's also challenging uh for

59:03 ↗ affordability for rental. But one of the

59:06 ↗ things that they really brought out was

59:08 ↗ that um while we may think, oh, it's

59:10 ↗ cheaper to rent than to own is that the

59:12 ↗ uncertainty of renting here or renting

59:15 ↗ actually anywhere in our region um is is

59:18 ↗ a detriment because they they know the

59:20 ↗ rate there's a a fear that the rates

59:22 ↗ will go up pretty quickly at their next

59:24 ↗ um lease turnover. And there was an

59:26 ↗ anecdotal story of an employee who was

59:29 ↗ recruited into the area. he was looking

59:31 ↗ at the new apartment complex here. Um,

59:34 ↗ and there's a three-month delay. I'm not

59:36 ↗ sure if it was for his job or for the

59:38 ↗ apartment community. And when he came

59:40 ↗ back, it was a $500 uh increase in what

59:43 ↗ he was quoted the first time around. So,

59:46 ↗ um, those are things as people think

59:48 ↗ about what I'm going to do, where I'm

59:49 ↗ going to live. So they are then so then

59:52 ↗ what what business employers had told us

59:55 ↗ is that so then they decide instead of

59:57 ↗ renting uh closer to work if they feel

1:00:00 ↗ that they have to go someplace to own

1:00:02 ↗ they have to go farther to actually

1:00:03 ↗ purchase. So it actually encoura there's

1:00:06 ↗ there's less stability in knowing that

1:00:08 ↗ okay I can afford rental now but I may

1:00:10 ↗ not be able to afford it in six months

1:00:12 ↗ or a year when my lease comes up.

1:00:15 ↗ Any additions or thoughts with that from

1:00:18 ↗ folks? Okay. people were moving further

1:00:21 ↗ away to find affordable housing. Yes.

1:00:23 ↗ Yes. Right. And and because of the rent,

1:00:25 ↗ usually renting is kind of the easy way

1:00:28 ↗ to to afford a community, but the fear

1:00:30 ↗ that you you won't be able to afford it

1:00:32 ↗ pretty soon encourages you to move out

1:00:34 ↗ farther even quicker than you may

1:00:37 ↗ normally want to go and own. And so it

1:00:40 ↗ yeah pushes you out a little farther. Um

1:00:43 ↗ then there's missing diversity of

1:00:44 ↗ housing types. And I think um Arthur uh

1:00:46 ↗ talked a lot about this. the um pretty

1:00:50 ↗ much across the board two bedrooms is

1:00:52 ↗ what people want whether it's a house or

1:00:54 ↗ apartment or a condo and um I think what

1:00:57 ↗ uh the chamber prese director mentioned

1:01:00 ↗ that uh she had heard somebody recently

1:01:03 ↗ talk about how we thought that the baby

1:01:06 ↗ boomers as they uh were downsizing the

1:01:09 ↗ millennials would take over their

1:01:11 ↗ housing right so I you know I'm a baby

1:01:14 ↗ boomer my kids are gone I'm gonna I want

1:01:16 ↗ to downsize the millennials will be

1:01:17 ↗ starting to have families and go and and

1:01:20 ↗ move into those homes. Well, what's

1:01:21 ↗ happening is they are all wanting to

1:01:24 ↗ have either the smaller home or the the

1:01:27 ↗ condo townhouse that doesn't have as

1:01:29 ↗ much yard work so they can go enjoy life

1:01:31 ↗ and uh have time for the things they

1:01:34 ↗ besides yard work. And as we look at

1:01:36 ↗ what was being built in our last 10 or

1:01:39 ↗ so years, it's not the two-bedroom condo

1:01:42 ↗ or house. If there's any place where

1:01:44 ↗ there is a two-bedroom house, it's it's

1:01:46 ↗ very sought sought after. So, um, look,

1:01:50 ↗ people like the idea of accessory

1:01:52 ↗ dwelling units, mother-in-law

1:01:54 ↗ apartments, other things, but we don't

1:01:56 ↗ see that as as, uh, growing quickly in

1:01:59 ↗ our community. We see the three and

1:02:00 ↗ fourbedroom homes that are being built.

1:02:02 ↗ Um, and now, you know, a little bit

1:02:04 ↗ uptick of the multifamily

1:02:07 ↗ transportation. Yes. So, traffic,

1:02:09 ↗ transportation is is important. Um

1:02:11 ↗ getting people in and in and around town

1:02:13 ↗ is of course challenging. Um and also

1:02:18 ↗ uh we had a lot of uh businesses who

1:02:20 ↗ talked about shifting their start times

1:02:23 ↗ in order to uh allow their employees to

1:02:26 ↗ come in later to avoid that that

1:02:28 ↗ traffic. But then sometimes it didn't

1:02:30 ↗ work because their clients needed them

1:02:31 ↗ there at 8 or 9:00. So they uh some

1:02:34 ↗ businesses that worked okay for some

1:02:36 ↗ didn't and some you know weren't able to

1:02:38 ↗ be that flexible. And so again, small

1:02:40 ↗ businesses, large businesses are dealing

1:02:42 ↗ with having um not just affordable

1:02:46 ↗ housing, but how do people get in and

1:02:47 ↗ around? And they even mentioned about

1:02:49 ↗ not even getting into the city and out

1:02:51 ↗ of the city, but around the city during

1:02:53 ↗ the day and how challenging it is. One

1:02:55 ↗ employer talked about how his uh

1:02:57 ↗ employee who lives in Isiqua, I think is

1:02:59 ↗ actually right outside of Isiqua. He

1:03:01 ↗ comes in on Isiqua Hobart Road.

1:03:03 ↗ Sometimes he's the one that's late the

1:03:05 ↗ most often because of traffic. So, um,

1:03:08 ↗ we may think, oh, it's so hard to get

1:03:09 ↗ from he, uh, from north or from, uh,

1:03:13 ↗ from other areas, but sometimes getting

1:03:14 ↗ around the city can be just as

1:03:16 ↗ challenging.

1:03:17 ↗ Um, so ret recruitment and retention of

1:03:20 ↗ employees. Um, so again, not having

1:03:23 ↗ housing that they can afford nearby. Um,

1:03:26 ↗ one of our um, employers talked about

1:03:28 ↗ that he may get a really good

1:03:30 ↗ salesperson and they are they're fine

1:03:33 ↗ driving a little bit uh, farther than

1:03:36 ↗ they normally would. Um, as soon as they

1:03:38 ↗ get kind of some experience under their

1:03:40 ↗ wings and they can transfer to another

1:03:42 ↗ location that's closer to home, they're

1:03:44 ↗ gone. So, he's constantly renew, you

1:03:47 ↗ know, kind of losing employees um, and

1:03:50 ↗ having to start the team over and then

1:03:51 ↗ keeping employees. Um, so we talked to

1:03:55 ↗ the school district today and they also

1:03:57 ↗ talked about once you once um, uh,

1:04:01 ↗ they've been in this in the school

1:04:02 ↗ district for a couple years and get some

1:04:03 ↗ experience and there's if there's an

1:04:05 ↗ opportunity to be closer to where they

1:04:07 ↗ can afford to live, they usually take

1:04:09 ↗ that option. And I think, you know,

1:04:10 ↗ there's a lot of um, and that goes into

1:04:13 ↗ the next one. There are a lot of reasons

1:04:14 ↗ for the housing choices people make. And

1:04:16 ↗ as you think about where you have chosen

1:04:18 ↗ to live or where you have cho in the

1:04:19 ↗ past, it's not just affordable housing,

1:04:22 ↗ although that may be part of it, right?

1:04:24 ↗ You may be making decisions for based on

1:04:26 ↗ on all these things here. So, who's

1:04:28 ↗ who's the person that first got a job

1:04:30 ↗ and where they moved from? Um what

1:04:32 ↗ what's most important to you? Do you

1:04:34 ↗ prefer to be in a more open area? You

1:04:35 ↗ want a more urban set area? Um, I think

1:04:39 ↗ one of the things that uh that some of

1:04:42 ↗ the uh employers talked about is that

1:04:44 ↗ their young employees want to be close

1:04:46 ↗ to amenities. So we, you know, we think

1:04:47 ↗ about the Bellev or downtown, but they

1:04:49 ↗ also like the outdoors. So Isiqua is

1:04:51 ↗ attractive for that. And we are trying

1:04:53 ↗ to add more of those amenities and more

1:04:55 ↗ of those um entertainment options so

1:04:57 ↗ that people can go and and feel like

1:04:59 ↗ there's some some opportunities in the

1:05:01 ↗ evening to go out and and and uh enjoy

1:05:04 ↗ themselves.

1:05:06 ↗ And then um as Arthur also uh talked

1:05:09 ↗ about is that uh we we asked them

1:05:12 ↗ because we c we know we can't solve all

1:05:15 ↗ housing issues at once right here at the

1:05:17 ↗ city. We're trying to really figure out

1:05:19 ↗ where can we best have an impact and

1:05:21 ↗ again this is three focus groups so this

1:05:23 ↗ is not the answer yet. Um, but what

1:05:26 ↗ really seemed to be key is talking to

1:05:28 ↗ the employers is if we could provide

1:05:30 ↗ some more housing opportunities for

1:05:32 ↗ those who make between 40 and $60,000,

1:05:35 ↗ that would really help them. Now, that

1:05:37 ↗ doesn't mean that all their employees

1:05:38 ↗ make between 40 and 60. That that's a a

1:05:42 ↗ key area of um of their employees that

1:05:47 ↗ would really help to keep them there,

1:05:50 ↗ help them to attract other employees

1:05:52 ↗ from other areas. And um so that was

1:05:54 ↗ just something again from three focus

1:05:56 ↗ groups that we heard that was about in

1:05:59 ↗ that range.

1:06:03 ↗ Any questions or comments

1:06:06 ↗ or anything that people like to add who

1:06:07 ↗ who sat in in those u focus groups? So

1:06:09 ↗ Joan joined us, Derek joined us, Christy

1:06:12 ↗ joined us, Elizabeth was there as well.

1:06:15 ↗ Thank you for all for doing that. Yes,

1:06:18 ↗ Richard. Where do the lower income

1:06:19 ↗ employees in Isiqua live now?

1:06:22 ↗ I don't know that I know that. Um there

1:06:24 ↗ are some there are some uh low-income

1:06:26 ↗ housing op uh complexes or apartments

1:06:30 ↗ here in um or housing in Isiqua. I don't

1:06:34 ↗ there is a I believe there's actually a

1:06:35 ↗ map in your packet that shows those are

1:06:38 ↗ the subsidized ones. Um in general um I

1:06:43 ↗ think what are we heard from employers

1:06:44 ↗ that those are not living in Isiqua.

1:06:46 ↗ They're living That's what I was

1:06:47 ↗ assuming like or so. Oh, okay. So, we

1:06:50 ↗ asked Yeah, we did we we did ask where

1:06:52 ↗ they are mostly coming from and south.

1:06:54 ↗ So, you're talking about Maple Valley,

1:06:55 ↗ you're talking about Reton, you're

1:06:56 ↗ talking about Kent, Auburn. Sometimes

1:06:58 ↗ people talked as far away as uh the

1:07:00 ↗ other side of Tacoma. Um and uh yeah, I

1:07:04 ↗ think we had a Black Diamond. Ellen,

1:07:06 ↗ Black Diamond. Yeah. Uh Ocean Shores for

1:07:09 ↗ one person, but that was a per that was

1:07:11 ↗ a nursing staff that actually could stay

1:07:13 ↗ overnight. They they worked three days

1:07:15 ↗ in a row and then So, shift work. I

1:07:17 ↗ mean, that was one of the things in a

1:07:18 ↗ couple of our businesses and not just

1:07:20 ↗ the hospital, but shift work also

1:07:21 ↗ allows. So, if you're working for three

1:07:23 ↗ days and you're off for four or five,

1:07:26 ↗ maybe that drive isn't so bad, right?

1:07:27 ↗ You're coming in and driving out on on

1:07:30 ↗ an odd shift. So, again, that's more of

1:07:31 ↗ the the reasons for your your housing

1:07:33 ↗ choices. You may you may be fine with

1:07:35 ↗ that, but I think, you know, our goal is

1:07:36 ↗ to allow you the opportunity if you want

1:07:39 ↗ to live in Isiqua um to have that

1:07:41 ↗ choice right?

1:07:44 ↗ Hey, Jen. Yeah. Um, and Arthur probably

1:07:46 ↗ can answer this better. Um, as a

1:07:49 ↗ developer, you always have a hard time

1:07:52 ↗ of saying, "How do you make these

1:07:53 ↗ pencil?" I mean, at the end of the day,

1:07:54 ↗ you got to be able to afford it. Um,

1:07:57 ↗ I've grown up in the area. I grew up

1:07:58 ↗ down south as a kid, so I watched Summer

1:08:00 ↗ grow like crazy, and my dad commuted to

1:08:03 ↗ Boeing. That's where you could afford to

1:08:04 ↗ live. And I think for generations, it's

1:08:06 ↗ always been that way. I mean, there's

1:08:08 ↗ just certain income levels that have

1:08:11 ↗ different areas to live. And

1:08:13 ↗ unfortunately, it's just very difficult

1:08:15 ↗ with a we're constrained by geographic

1:08:18 ↗ challenges here. We've got wetland

1:08:20 ↗ issues. We've got streams running

1:08:21 ↗ underneath everywhere to build something

1:08:24 ↗ that can make it truly affordable in

1:08:26 ↗ these numbers. It just it just doesn't

1:08:28 ↗ work. So, the question is how do you

1:08:30 ↗ make that work and how do you incent

1:08:33 ↗ developers to look at it and say yes,

1:08:34 ↗ this is going to work for us and we can

1:08:37 ↗ develop. Well, I think that's what we're

1:08:39 ↗ hoping to and I'll let Arthur come up

1:08:41 ↗ and talk. I think he had one of those

1:08:42 ↗ slides that talked about them, you know,

1:08:44 ↗ tax tax credits and or exemptions and uh

1:08:48 ↗ fee waiverss and those types of things.

1:08:50 ↗ So, if you have some other question or

1:08:51 ↗ answers, but that's one of the things

1:08:53 ↗ we're looking at. So, if we want to do

1:08:54 ↗ that, what are our tools?

1:08:58 ↗ So, I'm going to take the liberty to say

1:08:59 ↗ there were two questions in there. One

1:09:01 ↗ is sort of the historic patterns of some

1:09:04 ↗ areas just have had lower, you know,

1:09:05 ↗ that lower cost housing and people

1:09:07 ↗ commute. I think, you know, I first

1:09:09 ↗ lived here in the 70s and you could

1:09:12 ↗ commute from here to Seattle in 30

1:09:13 ↗ minutes or less. What's often a key

1:09:16 ↗ issue for location is how how long it

1:09:19 ↗ takes. It's not necessarily what mode,

1:09:21 ↗ it's how long does it take you to get to

1:09:23 ↗ your job. And if you're spending an hour

1:09:25 ↗ and a half, then it starts to be a

1:09:28 ↗ burden. So, sort of like it's sort of

1:09:30 ↗ I've heard it's 20 minutes is the goal,

1:09:32 ↗ but 20 to 30 minutes is when people are

1:09:34 ↗ like, "Okay, whatever." And then so if

1:09:36 ↗ you drew a map back in 1970s and you

1:09:39 ↗ said what can you get to in 30 minutes

1:09:41 ↗ you'd see a different size circle than

1:09:43 ↗ when you have that today. So the company

1:09:46 ↗ that I work for in the barrier was

1:09:47 ↗ formed by the business community where

1:09:48 ↗ that was already happening. Same issue

1:09:51 ↗ and they were saying we've got to find

1:09:53 ↗ ways to get that time down. So we are

1:09:55 ↗ going to create a company to build

1:09:57 ↗ different cost housing because otherwise

1:09:59 ↗ we're worried about recruitment etc and

1:10:02 ↗ we need a better balance in our

1:10:03 ↗ community. So it's about time. I mean I

1:10:06 ↗ mean it's about the issue of time and

1:10:08 ↗ how that plays out for getting to work.

1:10:10 ↗ Now in terms of what do we do? That's

1:10:13 ↗ what we're saying is the different

1:10:14 ↗ strategies that we've had. Sometimes the

1:10:16 ↗ strategies are how do you ooch the

1:10:18 ↗ market within a normal market rate

1:10:20 ↗ development. So that's where you allow

1:10:21 ↗ more units where some of them now come

1:10:23 ↗ down to a different price point. And the

1:10:25 ↗ two main tools that we use are more

1:10:28 ↗ density because land is an expensive

1:10:30 ↗ component. So if you can get them more

1:10:31 ↗ density, you essentially got them free

1:10:33 ↗ land, but instead of having all the

1:10:34 ↗ units a little bit less, you say, let's

1:10:36 ↗ take that extra density and have some of

1:10:38 ↗ the units be at a lower point. The other

1:10:40 ↗ is property taxes or fees is so you're

1:10:43 ↗ taking costs away from the developer so

1:10:45 ↗ that that allows the math to work. The

1:10:47 ↗ other is when we provide then direct

1:10:49 ↗ assistance that's also leveraging that's

1:10:51 ↗ usually also leveraging other subsidy

1:10:53 ↗ sources. And so that's basically a

1:10:55 ↗ different financing mechanism where the

1:10:56 ↗ the user of that in exchange for not

1:10:59 ↗ having to pay it back or having really

1:11:00 ↗ really low interest rates gets to have

1:11:03 ↗ to have certain amount of housing

1:11:04 ↗ affordable. But when you combine your

1:11:07 ↗ city resources with higher, you know,

1:11:09 ↗ state and county resources, that allows

1:11:12 ↗ us to get all the way down to 30 and 50%

1:11:14 ↗ of median because of it's just like you

1:11:16 ↗ say, it's all math and things along

1:11:18 ↗ those lines. So a little bit of all of

1:11:20 ↗ those factors um are part of what you're

1:11:22 ↗ saying and that's one of the ch and then

1:11:24 ↗ other times like I said the example in

1:11:26 ↗ Redmond is would somebody have built a

1:11:29 ↗ 200 to 300 foot unit 15 years ago here?

1:11:32 ↗ No. But when they build it now it gets

1:11:35 ↗ filled. People might you know people

1:11:38 ↗ sort of look at housing a couple

1:11:39 ↗ different ways. One is what you'd like

1:11:42 ↗ to have and what works for you. Okay.

1:11:45 ↗ And sometimes that second one, look at

1:11:46 ↗ how many of you were in when when you

1:11:48 ↗ were students lived in something

1:11:50 ↗ significantly small when you were doing

1:11:52 ↗ that. How many of you were in dorms or

1:11:55 ↗ something along those lines? You did

1:11:57 ↗ that for how long? Maybe four or five

1:11:59 ↗ years. So that's a need out there. Um

1:12:03 ↗ and so the market sometimes we as

1:12:05 ↗ communities assume what is good housing

1:12:08 ↗ and we assume it over when we don't

1:12:10 ↗ think about everybody but some of the

1:12:12 ↗ stuff we think isn't good housing for

1:12:14 ↗ somebody else maybe it works just fine

1:12:17 ↗ and so one of it is do you that's where

1:12:19 ↗ I say the neighbors can come in and

1:12:21 ↗ affect what happens is do you let the

1:12:23 ↗ market how far do you let the market go

1:12:26 ↗ to being creative in doing this kind of

1:12:28 ↗ stuff so those small units in Redmond

1:12:31 ↗ not a dime of subs subsidy. Okay, he's

1:12:34 ↗ getting more per square foot than

1:12:35 ↗ anybody else and his rents though are

1:12:38 ↗ affordable at 55% of median income.

1:12:41 ↗ They're really small, but there are

1:12:43 ↗ enough people and not all singles are

1:12:45 ↗ going to do that, but he's found 300

1:12:47 ↗ people in Redmond who are willing to do

1:12:49 ↗ it. So that's, you know, so all of those

1:12:51 ↗ are parts of get what you're asking.

1:12:54 ↗ Just a follow up on that. I think one of

1:12:56 ↗ the other stats that might be

1:12:57 ↗ interesting is know how many people

1:12:58 ↗ actually have vehicles and commute

1:13:00 ↗ versus is it a onecar family, twocar

1:13:02 ↗ family, threecar family, sixcar family,

1:13:05 ↗ you know, I mean, so u back to your

1:13:07 ↗ micro units. I mean, who would have

1:13:09 ↗ thought downtown Seattle you could build

1:13:10 ↗ an apartment building with no parking at

1:13:12 ↗ all, right? I mean, I would never do it,

1:13:14 ↗ but other developers have figured out a

1:13:16 ↗ way to do it, right? Good point.

1:13:22 ↗ Yeah.

1:13:24 ↗ So, um I do have another question. I

1:13:27 ↗ might have to go back to your slide that

1:13:29 ↗ shows his slide. His slide. Yes. That

1:13:32 ↗ shows um

1:13:36 ↗ proportional need of low and very low. I

1:13:40 ↗ thought it was like 13% or something and

1:13:43 ↗ we only have 3%. Um

1:13:47 ↗ if you could go back to that. What?

1:13:49 ↗ What? I My question is um is that it is

1:13:54 ↗ that the right one? It's a table. I

1:13:56 ↗ thought the one that showed the 3%. You

1:13:57 ↗ had the 3% 3%. Okay, got it. I think you

1:14:00 ↗ mean

1:14:03 ↗ that one. Correct. Thank you. So, um,

1:14:07 ↗ what what I think I understand so far is

1:14:10 ↗ that we have a proportional need and and

1:14:14 ↗ my question is going to be I could you

1:14:16 ↗ walk through that just again quickly on

1:14:18 ↗ how that 12% is derived. But what I'm

1:14:21 ↗ hearing is is that we only have 3%

1:14:23 ↗ compared to the 12%. Right. And then I

1:14:26 ↗ see information from focus groups

1:14:30 ↗ saying, "Yeah, you know, we're having a

1:14:32 ↗ little bit bit of a retention problem

1:14:35 ↗ with our employees because it's too hard

1:14:38 ↗ to get here and they have to live too

1:14:40 ↗ far away. So, it's hard for me to

1:14:43 ↗ connect the dots that we're having a

1:14:45 ↗ crisis. Mhm. But I think it is it fair

1:14:49 ↗ to say that we're seeing enough evidence

1:14:53 ↗ that I um we do have a shortage of some

1:14:58 ↗ sort. It's hard for me to get to the

1:15:01 ↗ shortage you're showing in the table.

1:15:04 ↗ 12% versus 3%. It seems like a huge gap,

1:15:09 ↗ right? But I'm not seeing evidence that

1:15:11 ↗ we're that that that screams to me

1:15:13 ↗ crisis, but I'm not seeing other

1:15:14 ↗ evidence of oh my god, I hear about it

1:15:17 ↗ in Seattle maybe, but maybe not here in

1:15:19 ↗ Isiqua. So, okay. Can you can you cover

1:15:23 ↗ again just quickly how the proportional

1:15:25 ↗ need of 12% was was derived? So the 12%

1:15:29 ↗ is that is saying that

1:15:33 ↗ when we look at the county as a whole

1:15:35 ↗ and I kind of call that an economic area

1:15:38 ↗ that of all the households 12% of the

1:15:42 ↗ households earn 0 to 30% of median

1:15:45 ↗ income. That's what their income is and

1:15:47 ↗ then another 12% have incomes between 30

1:15:49 ↗ and 50. And my com and and what's

1:15:52 ↗ interesting is now we do this data all

1:15:54 ↗ the time. You know, this is census data

1:15:56 ↗ and they do it now on a rolling basis,

1:15:58 ↗ but for most of my life, it was every 10

1:16:00 ↗ years they'd ask this question. And they

1:16:02 ↗ always ask that question based on our

1:16:04 ↗ peak economy years. You know how we've

1:16:06 ↗ had our cycles? Our cycles of peak

1:16:08 ↗ economy have coincided with the years of

1:16:10 ↗ the census 79, 89, right? 99. They're

1:16:14 ↗ all that's usually when our peak economy

1:16:16 ↗ is. So what that is telling us is that

1:16:19 ↗ even in a peak economy period that's the

1:16:21 ↗ profile of households income and it

1:16:25 ↗ hasn't shifted. If anything what's

1:16:27 ↗ happened you know you hear about the

1:16:29 ↗ disparity of incomes that incomes are

1:16:31 ↗ sort of nationally more you know that

1:16:34 ↗ maybe the percentage has gone up a

1:16:36 ↗ little bit of the very low income and

1:16:38 ↗ and low income relative to and then has

1:16:41 ↗ gone down a little bit in the middle and

1:16:43 ↗ then has gone up a little bit at the

1:16:44 ↗ high end. Generally speaking, this is

1:16:47 ↗ the percentage distribution we get from

1:16:49 ↗ the economy of King County. Now, that's

1:16:52 ↗ why I made the point about, well, that's

1:16:53 ↗ King County's economy. We have higher

1:16:55 ↗ median income here, but that's of the

1:16:57 ↗ people who live here. That's why I made

1:16:59 ↗ the point earlier, your profile of your

1:17:01 ↗ jobs in this community, and we have a

1:17:04 ↗ chart that we've done that shows the

1:17:05 ↗ profile, how many jobs are at different

1:17:07 ↗ income levels. Your profile is very

1:17:10 ↗ similar to the countywide averages. If

1:17:11 ↗ anything, you're a little bit lower. So

1:17:14 ↗ that would imply that from your

1:17:15 ↗ workforce you are probably generating

1:17:18 ↗ households that is a mixture that's not

1:17:20 ↗ that dissimilar than these countywide

1:17:23 ↗ figures. Okay. Okay. So that's where

1:17:25 ↗ that's coming from. Now you say where

1:17:26 ↗ are the numbers and you're right and I

1:17:29 ↗ showed it two different ways because

1:17:30 ↗ we've kind of changed how we look at it.

1:17:32 ↗ This middle chart is looking at overall

1:17:35 ↗ housing supply which is how we're asked

1:17:37 ↗ to sort of think about it now. What we

1:17:40 ↗ were asked to do from 1992 until this

1:17:43 ↗ year, so almost 25 years, is take it as

1:17:46 ↗ a percentage of your growth. We're we're

1:17:49 ↗ not going to make you think too hard

1:17:50 ↗ about all the existing inequity. Let's

1:17:53 ↗ just try to deal with the growth

1:17:54 ↗ component each city. And so that's we're

1:17:56 ↗ showing you numbers here that you would

1:17:58 ↗ have created 815, you know, based on

1:18:01 ↗ your growth targets, you would have

1:18:03 ↗ created 800 units that are affordable up

1:18:05 ↗ to 50% of median and you created 191.

1:18:09 ↗ You would have created 540 units

1:18:11 ↗ affordable between 50 and 80 and you

1:18:13 ↗ actually created 477. And that's where

1:18:16 ↗ I'm saying now is when you really start

1:18:17 ↗ getting in the strategy plans. You heard

1:18:18 ↗ the comments from the employers saying

1:18:21 ↗ stuff. Well, probably very little of

1:18:24 ↗ that housing is ownership. It's almost

1:18:26 ↗ all rental and it's mostly probably

1:18:28 ↗ smaller rental. But there is a certain

1:18:30 ↗ amount that is because for you at least,

1:18:32 ↗ you did have the requirement in Isqua

1:18:34 ↗ Highlands and in in Talis that they had

1:18:38 ↗ to do a lot of the developments included

1:18:40 ↗ it and they had to have the same unit

1:18:41 ↗ mix as the rest of the development. So

1:18:44 ↗ you probably have a better mix than most

1:18:45 ↗ cities within this moderate range of

1:18:47 ↗ meeting a wider range because you have

1:18:49 ↗ ownership units in there which very few

1:18:51 ↗ cities have any of in that in this 477

1:18:54 ↗ figure but you did get that through that

1:18:56 ↗ intentional activity. Okay. So, it's

1:18:59 ↗ important to not is to also start

1:19:00 ↗ looking at this chart because in a

1:19:04 ↗ healthy housing market,

1:19:06 ↗ firsttime home buyers, when you get to

1:19:08 ↗ 70% of median income, you should be able

1:19:11 ↗ to start thinking about, hm, maybe I

1:19:14 ↗ could be a homeowner. Okay, that's if

1:19:17 ↗ you look at historic nationally and

1:19:19 ↗ stuff. That's about the income level

1:19:21 ↗ where hm I should be able to save a

1:19:23 ↗ little bit. I should lowerric ownership

1:19:26 ↗ homes in a healthy market where you want

1:19:28 ↗ people moving through from being renters

1:19:30 ↗ to owners and then up to scale. That's

1:19:32 ↗ where you ideally want to start having

1:19:34 ↗ some housing affordability for

1:19:35 ↗ ownership.

1:19:37 ↗ Thank you. So could you go to slide 13

1:19:42 ↗ because I think that the other side of

1:19:44 ↗ the coin is well how much does it cost

1:19:45 ↗ us to create these units? And so you

1:19:48 ↗ mentioned uh if sort of it's the

1:19:51 ↗ moderate income segment the 40 to 60k

1:19:54 ↗ that uh was what the initial survey said

1:19:56 ↗ was the gap and it looked like we were

1:19:58 ↗ successful relatively on the if I'm

1:20:00 ↗ looking at the right hand side of the

1:20:01 ↗ chart and that on the past. Do you have

1:20:03 ↗ a sense for how much that cost the

1:20:06 ↗ community or the city or the tax base?

1:20:08 ↗ Great great question. And before you

1:20:09 ↗ answer it, I think the other important

1:20:11 ↗ thing that I'm thinking about is in the

1:20:13 ↗ context of, hey, part of all the

1:20:15 ↗ complaints about traffic are because

1:20:17 ↗ people can't live here. So there's

1:20:18 ↗ there's as many people trying to come in

1:20:20 ↗ as there are people that live here going

1:20:22 ↗ out. So if you could live and work in

1:20:23 ↗ the same community and we're putting up

1:20:25 ↗ bills with with substantial price tags

1:20:28 ↗ um on that side to solve something. This

1:20:30 ↗ is kind of um as I see it very linked uh

1:20:34 ↗ in that if you provided different

1:20:36 ↗ solutions you might have fewer people

1:20:37 ↗ commuting um which would be a different

1:20:40 ↗ way other than trying to build more

1:20:42 ↗ roads or improve the roads we have to

1:20:44 ↗ reduce traffic and and kind of help

1:20:46 ↗ everyone out. A quick note on that front

1:20:49 ↗ is in California, they have figured out

1:20:53 ↗ in the Bay Area that they get more bang

1:20:55 ↗ for their bucks in some circumstances to

1:20:57 ↗ use transit dollars to build housing

1:20:59 ↗ right next to transit stations because

1:21:02 ↗ the people who live in that housing are

1:21:03 ↗ going to use transit versus other roads.

1:21:05 ↗ And they've actually found they get more

1:21:07 ↗ the amount of wrership they get from

1:21:10 ↗ doing that is as high as is it makes up

1:21:13 ↗ for the cost of building the housing.

1:21:15 ↗ Now, but going to your other question

1:21:17 ↗ about um the cost here, which is a great

1:21:20 ↗ point, and that is that the purple bar.

1:21:24 ↗ Now, the answer to that question

1:21:28 ↗ depends

1:21:30 ↗ also

1:21:32 ↗ on

1:21:34 ↗ which

1:21:37 ↗ who you're asking. It's not the same for

1:21:40 ↗ everybody. Okay? So, I'm going to give

1:21:42 ↗ an illustration of that in a minute. So

1:21:45 ↗ theoretically the market doesn't cost

1:21:48 ↗ the public anything per se but some

1:21:50 ↗ people would say but I need all these

1:21:51 ↗ roads that need to get built if I let

1:21:53 ↗ there be more housing built. So right so

1:21:55 ↗ there can be different ways of looking

1:21:57 ↗ at that. Um there is no capital housing

1:22:00 ↗ outlay per se but now you've got a city

1:22:02 ↗ with people if you use it you know if

1:22:04 ↗ you have diversity of housing. Now that

1:22:06 ↗ may or may not be the case but diversity

1:22:07 ↗ of housing theoretically is you're

1:22:09 ↗ letting the market play without any

1:22:10 ↗ direct intervention other than what you

1:22:12 ↗ allow get built. The green section

1:22:15 ↗ typically doesn't have a direct monetary

1:22:17 ↗ expense, but this is definitely one

1:22:18 ↗ where there might be considerations of

1:22:20 ↗ maybe there are costs because if you're

1:22:22 ↗ using more density to allow that to

1:22:25 ↗ happen with some of that being

1:22:26 ↗ affordable, some people will say there's

1:22:28 ↗ pluses and minuses to that extra

1:22:30 ↗ density, but there isn't a cash outlay

1:22:32 ↗ per se. Okay. So, for the green and the

1:22:36 ↗ purple bar, a lot of those don't have a

1:22:39 ↗ direct capital outlay. Now the light

1:22:41 ↗ blue bar is definitely a c direct

1:22:44 ↗ capital outlay of one form or another

1:22:46 ↗ can show up as property tax exemptions.

1:22:49 ↗ So you're foregoing tax revenue. Now

1:22:51 ↗ some people will argue but sometimes

1:22:53 ↗ that's getting stuff built that's paying

1:22:54 ↗ other forms of taxes that aren't

1:22:56 ↗ otherwise generated. And so therefore

1:22:58 ↗ why you're not getting one tax source,

1:23:00 ↗ you're getting the sales tax from the

1:23:01 ↗ construction. You're getting the sales

1:23:03 ↗ tax from the retail if it's built on the

1:23:04 ↗ ground floor if it gets built. that

1:23:06 ↗ sometimes there's other forms of

1:23:07 ↗ taxation that can help offset um or at

1:23:10 ↗ least help make that decision. Um but

1:23:13 ↗ again, there's a debate back and forth

1:23:14 ↗ there. So, it's that land donations. So,

1:23:17 ↗ if you have surplus land, you don't need

1:23:19 ↗ it for any other public purpose. Can you

1:23:22 ↗ use that land? And if you do, do you

1:23:24 ↗ make it available at some kind of

1:23:25 ↗ discount? Now, I got my living going

1:23:29 ↗ building on surplus school properties. I

1:23:32 ↗ didn't get a nickel off because they're

1:23:34 ↗ saying that's a public benefit. we need

1:23:35 ↗ the money from the land so we can't give

1:23:37 ↗ that up. So you are there's a trade-off

1:23:39 ↗ there of that money from a land sale

1:23:42 ↗ could be used for some other purpose. Um

1:23:44 ↗ but sometimes just having access to

1:23:46 ↗ land. So we we made a living doing

1:23:48 ↗ affordable housing even when we paid

1:23:50 ↗ market value because no one else would

1:23:51 ↗ even talk to us. At least the school

1:23:52 ↗ districts were willing to talk to us and

1:23:54 ↗ try to get us the land because they saw

1:23:56 ↗ we were building housing affordable to

1:23:58 ↗ their teachers maybe. Um, so there's,

1:24:01 ↗ you know, now one of the the things I

1:24:03 ↗ say because everyone says, "Well, you're

1:24:05 ↗ an affordable housing people. Why do you

1:24:07 ↗ care about housing?" And it's, this is

1:24:09 ↗ the chart that tells you why. Because

1:24:11 ↗ there is no way there's enough money and

1:24:13 ↗ there never has been in this country to

1:24:14 ↗ direct assist everywhere where if you

1:24:16 ↗ just let the market do it on its own,

1:24:18 ↗ that gap between what the market does

1:24:20 ↗ with nothing versus direct subsidy,

1:24:22 ↗ there's just not enough money. So the

1:24:25 ↗ better job every community does in

1:24:27 ↗ allowing that purple and green bar to

1:24:29 ↗ work than with the green with that light

1:24:32 ↗ blue your resources part you can serve

1:24:34 ↗ the hardest to serve need and still by

1:24:37 ↗ doing all three meet a wide range of

1:24:40 ↗ needs in your community. Again my

1:24:42 ↗ premise always is this is your goal and

1:24:45 ↗ that includes like I said Bill Gates as

1:24:48 ↗ well as the person with no income who's

1:24:50 ↗ homeless and standing on the side of the

1:24:52 ↗ road. Yeah. Um,

1:24:55 ↗ addressing cost, we have to look not

1:24:58 ↗ only at the cost of providing housing,

1:25:01 ↗ but in that discrepancy area between the

1:25:05 ↗ 12% and the 3%. We have to look at the

1:25:08 ↗ cost of not having housing.

1:25:12 ↗ That's the 109 homeless school children,

1:25:17 ↗ the people who are packed in like

1:25:22 ↗ sardines.

1:25:24 ↗ uh into very small homes that they're

1:25:28 ↗ trying to share because there's nothing

1:25:30 ↗ left. Um

1:25:33 ↗ some of

1:25:36 ↗ some of the cost of not building the

1:25:39 ↗ housing is that we have people who

1:25:44 ↗ draw on the community for a whole lot of

1:25:47 ↗ needs that they wouldn't have if there

1:25:50 ↗ were housing.

1:25:52 ↗ So to that point, there's two words that

1:25:56 ↗ I, you know, when I'm trying to do this

1:25:59 ↗ and I look at the world when I'm working

1:26:01 ↗ on housing, I look at the world from the

1:26:03 ↗ point of the builder and I look at the

1:26:05 ↗ word world from the point of the

1:26:07 ↗ community and the existing and the

1:26:09 ↗ people who are having challenges. And

1:26:11 ↗ there are two words that stand out to me

1:26:14 ↗ when I'm trying to think about that. The

1:26:16 ↗ first word is for the builder. There's a

1:26:18 ↗ four-letter word that dictates the life

1:26:20 ↗ of a builder. Anyone know what that

1:26:22 ↗ four-letter word is?

1:26:25 ↗ Risk.

1:26:27 ↗ Okay, that shapes that. If you want one

1:26:31 ↗ word to define so much, the company I

1:26:33 ↗ work for, we worked with for-profit

1:26:36 ↗ developers and partnered with them. And

1:26:38 ↗ the whole thing we did is we said, how

1:26:39 ↗ can we reduce risk in exchange for them

1:26:41 ↗ giving us affordability as a

1:26:42 ↗ partnership? And there's so many ways

1:26:44 ↗ that plays out. time, costs, market

1:26:47 ↗ conditions, market profile. The word for

1:26:50 ↗ the community is stability.

1:26:53 ↗ Okay, that communities can be more

1:26:56 ↗ stable if they have a more diverse form

1:26:58 ↗ of housing. And the stability is for

1:27:00 ↗ those people who are struggling, but

1:27:01 ↗ it's also for the broader community.

1:27:04 ↗ People don't get insurance because they

1:27:06 ↗ can't afford it because they're doing it

1:27:07 ↗ all in housing. So, you have uninsured

1:27:09 ↗ people out in the community. That's just

1:27:10 ↗ sort of one kind of example. But part of

1:27:13 ↗ this is if you create stability for

1:27:15 ↗ families, it creates stability for

1:27:17 ↗ community as a whole. And there's lots

1:27:18 ↗ of different ways that can play out. So

1:27:20 ↗ the example with homeless is if they

1:27:21 ↗ don't if they have a home, they're not

1:27:23 ↗ using the emergency services which costs

1:27:25 ↗ a ton of money when they're constantly

1:27:27 ↗ in the hospital or high cost services.

1:27:29 ↗ And if you can get them in housing, they

1:27:31 ↗ don't cost that as much. So we can save

1:27:33 ↗ Seattle has a study that for one place

1:27:35 ↗ they built saves thousands and thousands

1:27:37 ↗ of dollars per year per person because

1:27:39 ↗ if they're on the street they're

1:27:40 ↗ constantly being going into emergency

1:27:42 ↗ services which cost a lot because they

1:27:44 ↗ have no insurance and the high stress

1:27:46 ↗ makes it harder for them to be

1:27:48 ↗ productive. Well, and that's right. So

1:27:50 ↗ if people are commuting an hour and a

1:27:52 ↗ half each way, how well are they doing

1:27:54 ↗ and they do you get a full eight hours

1:27:56 ↗ out of them or not? Or is it seven and a

1:27:58 ↗ half and some days seven? Those are all

1:28:00 ↗ different kinds of things that you know

1:28:02 ↗ potentially you think about. What

1:28:04 ↗ percentage of the need for affordable

1:28:06 ↗ housing do you think we can um achieve

1:28:12 ↗ under some reasonable plan moving

1:28:14 ↗ forward?

1:28:18 ↗ That's a great question and that's

1:28:19 ↗ something you're going to grapple a

1:28:20 ↗ little bit more with. Ryan, do you think

1:28:22 ↗ we can actually move the needle?

1:28:25 ↗ You know, there's sometimes I look at

1:28:27 ↗ stats for East King County and I go,

1:28:28 ↗ "Wow, we may be

1:28:32 ↗ we're getting really hit hard by the

1:28:34 ↗ really fast rising market rents because

1:28:37 ↗ that's taking the overall supply of

1:28:38 ↗ housing and making it less affordable.

1:28:40 ↗ So, if that bar doesn't, you know, that

1:28:42 ↗ chart if

1:28:47 ↗ if we don't see the kind of corrections

1:28:49 ↗ that we've seen in the past here, if we

1:28:52 ↗ get that correction, we get back down to

1:28:54 ↗ here.

1:28:55 ↗ there are it's been in a high-cost area

1:28:58 ↗ here. Sometimes when I look at the

1:29:00 ↗ numbers I can almost say, wow, we didn't

1:29:03 ↗ necessarily move the needle way up, but

1:29:06 ↗ we didn't go down and we didn't go

1:29:07 ↗ backwards, which in an area with a

1:29:09 ↗ booming economy is sometimes an

1:29:11 ↗ accomplishment. It hasn't gotten certain

1:29:14 ↗ things I look at, it hasn't gotten

1:29:16 ↗ worse. Um, but that's something you guys

1:29:19 ↗ are going to have to grapple with as we

1:29:20 ↗ talk about strategies because you can

1:29:22 ↗ see to get more done, there are choices

1:29:26 ↗ the community needs to make about what

1:29:27 ↗ they're willing to try to do to create

1:29:29 ↗ that diversity.

1:29:31 ↗ And the question becomes how far do you

1:29:33 ↗ want to go trying to achieve that? Um,

1:29:37 ↗ but you did get to 24% and 100 when you

1:29:40 ↗ looked at the growth projection

1:29:41 ↗ approach. you you know you can see some

1:29:43 ↗ numbers of relative to some numbers we

1:29:44 ↗ were working with how well we did. How

1:29:47 ↗ do we control rent in a matter because

1:29:51 ↗ we're in capitalism it's whatever the

1:29:56 ↗ market will bear. So if rent is going up

1:29:58 ↗ $200 a year and people are willing and

1:30:01 ↗ able to pay that then that is hence the

1:30:03 ↗ market rate and sustainable

1:30:07 ↗ to make it affordable. How do you

1:30:10 ↗ actually control the rent? Then if we

1:30:13 ↗ build affordable housing, let's say we

1:30:16 ↗ do, you know, 500 units of affordable

1:30:19 ↗ housing out on the valley, how do we can

1:30:22 ↗ keep it from going beyond the means of

1:30:25 ↗ the people who are living in the So

1:30:28 ↗ one thing this chart shows you is that

1:30:32 ↗ rents have a tendency if you take

1:30:35 ↗ economics or those kind of things, they

1:30:37 ↗ call it um liquidity or whatever that

1:30:40 ↗ fast reaction to conditions in the

1:30:42 ↗ market. And this is why this is so

1:30:45 ↗ surprising to me is because the rental

1:30:48 ↗ market income profile isn't all that

1:30:49 ↗ different. So why did this why has this

1:30:52 ↗ happened? Why didn't the market force a

1:30:55 ↗ correction already? And I don't know if

1:30:57 ↗ it's because the jobs housing ratios got

1:31:00 ↗ to a point where we only right the

1:31:02 ↗ supply only allows so much. So some

1:31:04 ↗ people would say supply and demand. If

1:31:07 ↗ you're going to generate jobs then

1:31:08 ↗ generate more housing. And if you

1:31:10 ↗ generate more housing, that will help

1:31:13 ↗ skew this. I do guarantee you, you know,

1:31:16 ↗ right now you literally have to pay a

1:31:19 ↗ reservation fee. This came up yesterday,

1:31:22 ↗ right, in one of the interviews. You

1:31:24 ↗ have to pay for the right to even submit

1:31:26 ↗ an application. Now, not accountant does

1:31:29 ↗ not go towards your first month's rent.

1:31:32 ↗ If you don't rent the unit, you don't

1:31:33 ↗ get the money back. They're doing that.

1:31:36 ↗ And they're not alone in your town.

1:31:37 ↗ We're seeing this around this region.

1:31:39 ↗ Now,

1:31:42 ↗ at this point in time, it probably felt

1:31:44 ↗ the same. At this point in time, you got

1:31:47 ↗ your first month free.

1:31:49 ↗ Okay, we won't see that forever.

1:31:53 ↗ There will be some correction at some

1:31:56 ↗ level, but some people would argue it's

1:31:59 ↗ supply and demand. So, one is supply and

1:32:02 ↗ the other is you can do a Detroit.

1:32:06 ↗ Okay? I mean, that's another part I

1:32:08 ↗ mean, that's part of the reality of

1:32:10 ↗ housing markets is Detroit used to have

1:32:12 ↗ some of the highest housing costs in

1:32:13 ↗ this country

1:32:15 ↗ back in the boom of the auto industry.

1:32:17 ↗ So, jobs, if jobs were to go away, that

1:32:20 ↗ would have an big impact. Now, we're all

1:32:22 ↗ hoping that doesn't happen. Um, that's

1:32:25 ↗ why things like this do happen, right?

1:32:27 ↗ This one is attributable to the dotcom,

1:32:30 ↗ right? Bust,

1:32:32 ↗ right? We had jobs go down in our

1:32:34 ↗ region. So rents went down. So it's a

1:32:37 ↗ that's why it's not a perfect answer. Um

1:32:39 ↗ but some people argue to some extent

1:32:41 ↗ it's supply. So you need to have supply

1:32:43 ↗ that's somewhat proportionate to your

1:32:46 ↗ demand, you know, your workforce and at

1:32:48 ↗ some level. Um some people resort to

1:32:50 ↗ rent control. Now that's not a common

1:32:53 ↗ approach and in this state it's not even

1:32:54 ↗ an allowed approach. But some areas have

1:32:57 ↗ said we're going to go that far with it.

1:32:59 ↗ not the typical American, you know,

1:33:02 ↗ economic system and it's not one that

1:33:04 ↗ I've ever worked within or have preached

1:33:06 ↗ or anything. It's just that yeah, you're

1:33:08 ↗ right. Your point is well taken is we're

1:33:10 ↗ you're not that's a really important

1:33:12 ↗ thing to keep in mind as we're doing a

1:33:14 ↗ strategy. You can't guarantee any result

1:33:17 ↗ overall in housing unless we completely

1:33:20 ↗ change our housing how we do our housing

1:33:22 ↗ market because most of our housing is

1:33:24 ↗ done through the private sector and

1:33:27 ↗ conditions impact them. If interest

1:33:29 ↗ rates all of a sudden go up to seven or

1:33:30 ↗ eight% versus 3 to 4% now that will have

1:33:33 ↗ a huge impact on what happens with

1:33:35 ↗ housing and this you know both ownership

1:33:37 ↗ and rental. So there's so many things

1:33:39 ↗ that you as government aren't act. It's

1:33:42 ↗ not like parts where you say we want 10

1:33:43 ↗ acres. This is how much money we need.

1:33:45 ↗ We're going to do it. It doesn't work

1:33:47 ↗ that because you are going to rely on a

1:33:49 ↗ lot of other players and all the

1:33:51 ↗ different factors that impact them.

1:33:53 ↗ Developers are driers are financing is

1:33:57 ↗ huge for what builders can do on a lot

1:34:01 ↗ of different fronts in a lot of

1:34:02 ↗ different ways. So that's one of the

1:34:03 ↗ challenges in this conversation is I

1:34:06 ↗ can't give you a guaranteed answer on

1:34:07 ↗ what if you do this you'll get that

1:34:08 ↗ answer. It's sort of what setting do you

1:34:11 ↗ get so that where will you be relative

1:34:13 ↗ to other players out there or other

1:34:15 ↗ cities? What can be done to enforce a

1:34:20 ↗ change in the numbers when a developer

1:34:22 ↗ applies for a permit to build in an area

1:34:26 ↗ I mean talking about isa

1:34:30 ↗ to increase the percentage of affordable

1:34:32 ↗ housing within the mega number of

1:34:36 ↗ housing that they're going to build. So

1:34:38 ↗ that's the the the primary thing that

1:34:40 ↗ you and other cities have done of

1:34:42 ↗ require at least a certain some

1:34:43 ↗ percentage that's not just pie in the

1:34:46 ↗ sky. You can't just say I want it to be

1:34:48 ↗ 30% at 50% or 24% at 50 because that's

1:34:51 ↗ what our needs say we want. Then it's

1:34:54 ↗ going to make it the economics whoever

1:34:56 ↗ said all the things about the economics

1:34:58 ↗ not work. So you but you do that as a

1:35:00 ↗ starting that's one thing that a lot of

1:35:02 ↗ cities have done is say we want a

1:35:04 ↗ certain percentage at a certain

1:35:05 ↗ affordability price. So, I recently read

1:35:08 ↗ that there's a a permit and out of the I

1:35:14 ↗ can't remember the numbers of all the

1:35:16 ↗ housings, it was going to be one

1:35:17 ↗ affordable housing and it was going to

1:35:19 ↗ be be given to a firefighter or some

1:35:21 ↗ kind of you know, right? Uh employed

1:35:26 ↗ person, but what about those that are

1:35:28 ↗ homeless or that don't have the income

1:35:30 ↗ of a firefighter? I mean, we need to put

1:35:34 ↗ a stop and and push a little bit more

1:35:37 ↗ for those affordable houses. So, that's

1:35:40 ↗ we're gonna allow them to build in our

1:35:42 ↗ city, right? And so the general premise

1:35:46 ↗ has been that within the market, you're

1:35:49 ↗ not trying to dictate that level of

1:35:51 ↗ affordability that that requires such

1:35:54 ↗ low rents that it's unreasonable to ask

1:35:56 ↗ the private sector who has lots of costs

1:35:58 ↗ to buy land and build it and manage it

1:36:00 ↗ and everything. It just doesn't

1:36:03 ↗ correspond. And so that's where we use

1:36:06 ↗ the direct assistance to work with

1:36:07 ↗ people saying if we can get you're not

1:36:10 ↗ gonna have a lower cost, but if we can

1:36:12 ↗ cover a lot of the costs for covering

1:36:15 ↗ that cost with subsidies, etc., then we

1:36:18 ↗ can ask you to have really low rents.

1:36:20 ↗ And that's what you and that's where for

1:36:22 ↗ your numbers when we go back to that

1:36:24 ↗ chart, you did manage to get

1:36:29 ↗ um 400. You've got 200 units that are

1:36:32 ↗ priced at under 50% a median and some

1:36:34 ↗ are as low as 30%. Some have section 8

1:36:37 ↗ which means it's any income and you can

1:36:38 ↗ afford to live there. So to get to that

1:36:41 ↗ level that's where the direct assistance

1:36:43 ↗ tools have to come into play. And so

1:36:45 ↗ that's trying to attract

1:36:48 ↗ federal and state dollars because this

1:36:50 ↗ country has believed that we need to

1:36:52 ↗ supplement the market and often those

1:36:54 ↗ kind of dollars don't land in co in

1:36:57 ↗ communities like yours because the costs

1:36:58 ↗ are high. So the cities have used their

1:37:01 ↗ resources to say we'll help take some of

1:37:03 ↗ the edge off the higher costs here so

1:37:05 ↗ that we can help people who are going

1:37:06 ↗ after that state and federal money.

1:37:11 ↗ So you stay here stay here. Um so one of

1:37:14 ↗ the things that it's really tempting to

1:37:16 ↗ do is to try to figure out how we can

1:37:17 ↗ fix this. So but we are in still the

1:37:19 ↗ stage of figuring out the needs right

1:37:21 ↗ and so we wanted your role to help us.

1:37:25 ↗ So, one of the things that was your

1:37:26 ↗ homework was to figure out what what

1:37:28 ↗ piece of information was confusing, what

1:37:30 ↗ piece was really good because when we go

1:37:31 ↗ out and talk to the focus groups, when

1:37:33 ↗ we go out and talk to the to the uh open

1:37:35 ↗ houses and the community and broad

1:37:37 ↗ broader, we want to make sure that

1:37:39 ↗ information, you know, it it makes

1:37:42 ↗ sense. It rings true. It it kind of

1:37:44 ↗ provides some context. So, um I mean, we

1:37:48 ↗ could talk all night about how we can

1:37:49 ↗ fix this and that will be our our next

1:37:51 ↗ step, right? Our next conversations. So

1:37:54 ↗ is there anything that you of the data

1:37:56 ↗ you saw or that you have question more

1:37:59 ↗ questions about or that you think is

1:38:01 ↗ important for us to share? Are there

1:38:02 ↗ needs are there things that we are

1:38:04 ↗ missing with this? Um anything else that

1:38:08 ↗ we kind of need to be able to go and and

1:38:10 ↗ and help us inform the further

1:38:12 ↗ conversations and believe me we will be

1:38:14 ↗ back and we will not that we will have

1:38:16 ↗ the answer but we'll have more

1:38:18 ↗ information so that we can help and you

1:38:20 ↗ can help us grapple through what can we

1:38:22 ↗ do. So, is there anything else, Arthur,

1:38:24 ↗ that we need I know that you need to

1:38:25 ↗ leave at 8. Okay. Right. We'll start

1:38:27 ↗ with that. Yeah. So, is there of the

1:38:29 ↗ information you saw, is there any is

1:38:32 ↗ there anything again that sticks out?

1:38:34 ↗ Yeah, I I would like to see some of the

1:38:36 ↗ same data on the communities where we

1:38:39 ↗ think that the lower income workers are

1:38:43 ↗ coming to work in Isiqua, like Reton,

1:38:45 ↗ maybe Northbend, Victoria, I don't know.

1:38:48 ↗ Sure. And we do actually have data where

1:38:49 ↗ people are traveling from. So, um, and

1:38:52 ↗ we had that in our economic vitality,

1:38:54 ↗ uh, strategic plan. Um, so we can pull

1:38:56 ↗ that data. I'm not sure if it goes into

1:38:57 ↗ the income levels, but it gives you a

1:38:59 ↗ better idea. Sure. Okay. Actually, I'd

1:39:02 ↗ like to see a breakdown of the types of

1:39:05 ↗ rental units that we have in terms of

1:39:07 ↗ luxury condominiums versus the what

1:39:11 ↗ everybody else can afford. Okay. So, can

1:39:14 ↗ I ask a clarify question? Sure. So when

1:39:17 ↗ you are you saying

1:39:20 ↗ multif family what are rental what are

1:39:22 ↗ owner and then price points for both or

1:39:25 ↗ is that what you're asking? So we have a

1:39:28 ↗ lot of luxury condominium units that are

1:39:30 ↗ being built right and when I see your um

1:39:34 ↗ your averages is that a weighted average

1:39:36 ↗ or is that actually a straight average

1:39:38 ↗ because luxury can actually skew those

1:39:41 ↗ numbers substantially.

1:39:44 ↗ So you will see in that report and we

1:39:47 ↗ can but we can high this is helpful to

1:39:48 ↗ us because the report's big and fat. So

1:39:51 ↗ let's hone in on what ones most stand

1:39:53 ↗ out to you. So we do have information on

1:39:56 ↗ the profile of the pricing of both rents

1:39:58 ↗ and ownership housing. And I can't

1:40:01 ↗ remember for the ownership we know if we

1:40:03 ↗ know if it's condo or single family. So

1:40:04 ↗ is that what you're sort of asking for

1:40:06 ↗ is understanding the volume of units

1:40:08 ↗ that are on the market for rent right?

1:40:10 ↗ What per what portion of those are

1:40:12 ↗ considered luxury and what are

1:40:14 ↗ considered and I don't use the term

1:40:16 ↗ luxury I'll say how many have units with

1:40:18 ↗ rents over 2,000 versus how many have

1:40:20 ↗ rents between 1500 and 2 I mean we can

1:40:22 ↗ give you several cross profile works so

1:40:25 ↗ that gets at it will you also be

1:40:27 ↗ breaking it out by number of bedrooms

1:40:32 ↗ we'll have to do some research to see

1:40:34 ↗ what it takes to be able to have the

1:40:36 ↗ price point breakout also be done on a

1:40:40 ↗ unit size. That sounds like a cross tabs

1:40:43 ↗ is what they call it. And I'm not quite

1:40:45 ↗ sure how readily available, but we'll

1:40:47 ↗ check that since we have some

1:40:50 ↗ information that there's a particular

1:40:53 ↗ number of bedrooms that's the preferred

1:40:55 ↗ thing, right? It would be helpful. Look

1:40:58 ↗ into that.

1:41:04 ↗ So, one of the things that I think we've

1:41:07 ↗ seen, if we go back to the notion of

1:41:08 ↗ supply and demand for our specific

1:41:10 ↗ community, I think we owe it to

1:41:12 ↗ ourselves, and I might hopefully I'm not

1:41:14 ↗ complicating the issue too much, but

1:41:17 ↗ there's been a lot that has changed in

1:41:19 ↗ our region and in our economy in the

1:41:21 ↗ last five years. And so I think it's

1:41:23 ↗ really important to think about things

1:41:26 ↗ like climate refugees,

1:41:29 ↗ the tech sector growth, and also foreign

1:41:33 ↗ capital investment or foreign

1:41:36 ↗ individuals who are coming to live and

1:41:37 ↗ work here too because we might hit the

1:41:40 ↗ needle for our community specifically,

1:41:42 ↗ but if we're not aware of the forces

1:41:44 ↗ that are around us, I think we might

1:41:46 ↗ miss that. So I think having that

1:41:47 ↗ conversation and understanding the data

1:41:49 ↗ from a big picture is important.

1:41:52 ↗ And um so I think that that is that is a

1:41:56 ↗ key to understand. And then I also think

1:41:59 ↗ if it's possible to understand what the

1:42:02 ↗ 2015 census data is telling us, I think

1:42:06 ↗ that it might tell a potentially

1:42:08 ↗ different story than what we saw in

1:42:10 ↗ 2010. If you also look at it in context

1:42:12 ↗ of the Great Recession, so there's been

1:42:14 ↗ a lot of es and flows since that point.

1:42:16 ↗ That's where we want to ask you what's

1:42:19 ↗ I'm not going to redo that whole big

1:42:21 ↗ report. I don't expect which are the

1:42:23 ↗ pieces of data that getting that updated

1:42:25 ↗ information you think would be most

1:42:27 ↗ helpful. I have and if you don't have if

1:42:29 ↗ you have an answer right now I'll take

1:42:30 ↗ that but also that's what we need to

1:42:32 ↗ hear from you is because we do update

1:42:34 ↗ some of our data but we can't afford

1:42:36 ↗ every year to update all the data to but

1:42:38 ↗ we're more than happy for key data.

1:42:40 ↗ There is certain data we do every year

1:42:41 ↗ and you may already and so we there are

1:42:43 ↗ certain things we are tracking like

1:42:45 ↗ rents. We track rents every year. We

1:42:47 ↗ track ownership prices every year. So

1:42:49 ↗ there are certain things we are tracking

1:42:51 ↗ on a very regular basis. But it'd be

1:42:53 ↗ helpful to know it would help you. I I

1:42:55 ↗ have one I think just if we're trying to

1:42:57 ↗ fill out that grid, it looks like the

1:42:59 ↗ household data type data is 2010. So if

1:43:02 ↗ there's an update on that given those

1:43:04 ↗ changes, that might be one that would be

1:43:06 ↗ important. And I'll just let you know,

1:43:08 ↗ we're seeing what I've seen in the

1:43:10 ↗ communities in East King County is when

1:43:12 ↗ I first showed up here, you were kind of

1:43:13 ↗ different than countywide averages. And

1:43:15 ↗ more and more of the cities are looking

1:43:16 ↗ more and more like the countywide

1:43:17 ↗ averages. And we're now seeing

1:43:19 ↗ stabilization in the household mixes and

1:43:22 ↗ not seeing as big a shift as we saw like

1:43:24 ↗ in the '9s where cities over here had

1:43:26 ↗ more families with children and now you

1:43:29 ↗ have less. It's not like it's still

1:43:30 ↗ going down. You sort of the plateau, but

1:43:32 ↗ we'll double check that. Okay. Okay. I

1:43:34 ↗ also have another question about rents.

1:43:38 ↗ Do you also take into consideration

1:43:41 ↗ homeowner fees when we do pricing of

1:43:45 ↗ ownership units?

1:43:50 ↗ We

1:43:52 ↗ in the data that's probably in your

1:43:55 ↗ back. We do not when we talk about

1:43:57 ↗ affordability and what's affordable we

1:43:59 ↗ do. But I'm not sure there's always a

1:44:02 ↗ direct correlation because then the

1:44:03 ↗ census data. I'm not sure how much the

1:44:06 ↗ census gets into that. So that is a you

1:44:09 ↗ know we do know if it's multif family

1:44:11 ↗ and therefore you have a sense of what

1:44:13 ↗ they are in general. Um so but I don't

1:44:16 ↗ think the census explicitly calls that

1:44:18 ↗ out but it's a great point and it is

1:44:19 ↗ something when we design programs we're

1:44:21 ↗ very conscious of because we do consider

1:44:24 ↗ that a housing expense. I'd be more

1:44:26 ↗ interested in the um the cost burdened

1:44:29 ↗ and severely costburdened categories and

1:44:31 ↗ if that's increased or if people seem to

1:44:34 ↗ be stretching themselves or being more

1:44:37 ↗ conservative. Okay.

1:44:40 ↗ All right.

1:44:45 ↗ Are we I'm sorry. Are we tracking how uh

1:44:48 ↗ how many people uh in these different

1:44:50 ↗ income brackets are staying in our

1:44:51 ↗ community? I'm thinking of uh the

1:44:54 ↗ explosion of growth that we've seen

1:44:55 ↗ through the sens through the census data

1:44:57 ↗ and I'm curious if we're tracking how

1:44:58 ↗ these income levels are staying or

1:45:00 ↗ moving in and out of our community and

1:45:02 ↗ at what rates. So, we do know the

1:45:06 ↗ profile

1:45:07 ↗ of the incomes in your community and

1:45:09 ↗ that we can update every year. Is it due

1:45:13 ↗ to who's moving in or some are moving

1:45:16 ↗ out that we don't know from the data we

1:45:18 ↗ have? We can only look at the overall

1:45:21 ↗ mix.

1:45:24 ↗ And I'm not sure that's really getting

1:45:26 ↗ at your question

1:45:31 ↗ and I'm not sure how we would get it

1:45:33 ↗ sort of being able to track individ

1:45:35 ↗ what's causing the change in profile of

1:45:37 ↗ incomes. I'm curious if people moving in

1:45:40 ↗ and out of our community uh is different

1:45:42 ↗ than that uh for our neighboring

1:45:44 ↗ communities um considering how much

1:45:46 ↗ growth that we've had. I want to know

1:45:47 ↗ how much of that is uh sticking around

1:45:50 ↗ um in the more traditional sense of how

1:45:51 ↗ our community used to be a few decades

1:45:53 ↗ ago or if that increase of population

1:45:56 ↗ has been more transient and is moving

1:45:57 ↗ through into neighboring communities.

1:46:02 ↗ That's a research issue that I'm not

1:46:04 ↗ sure how, but I I'll note it down and

1:46:06 ↗ I'll challenge ourselves to see if

1:46:08 ↗ there's some way to get at that issue.

1:46:11 ↗ Um, but I don't know if that's an

1:46:13 ↗ anecdotal is what we'll find or if

1:46:16 ↗ there's something else that gives us any

1:46:17 ↗ clue on that. But that's an interesting

1:46:20 ↗ question and but I'm going to let you

1:46:22 ↗ know up front. That's a challenging one.

1:46:24 ↗ Okay.

1:46:26 ↗ Is there a way to look at um

1:46:29 ↗ or our current state how long people

1:46:33 ↗ have lived here? Yes. Okay. You can look

1:46:36 ↗ at length of residency overall, right?

1:46:38 ↗ because that is something that is asked

1:46:40 ↗ in the a in the census data. That would

1:46:42 ↗ be interesting to know. Okay.

1:46:48 ↗ Do I Oh, sorry, Jeeoff. I'm going cut

1:46:51 ↗ you off. Do uh do we have the length of

1:46:54 ↗ time that they're renters? I think that

1:46:56 ↗ was kind of the question that John was

1:46:58 ↗ hitting on is do they rent for a certain

1:47:00 ↗ amount of time then buy or are they

1:47:03 ↗ longtime renters? So, is there a

1:47:05 ↗ anything that shows the the life cycle

1:47:07 ↗ of the the renters in our community of

1:47:09 ↗ how long they rent for?

1:47:13 ↗ And that's again, like I said, that

1:47:15 ↗ would be

1:47:17 ↗ you'd have we'd, you know, you'd call a

1:47:19 ↗ couple property owners and my guess, you

1:47:21 ↗ know, is your profile different than

1:47:22 ↗ other cities? I'm not sure. I would

1:47:24 ↗ assume that's the case, but um that

1:47:27 ↗ would be a matter of calling some

1:47:29 ↗ property owners and they'd give you

1:47:30 ↗ their anecdotal information. I don't

1:47:32 ↗ think that um there's enough correlation

1:47:36 ↗ to specific households in the data

1:47:38 ↗ that's typically out there. So, it would

1:47:40 ↗ be that kind of process. So, I'm trying

1:47:44 ↗ to think if I should if there's a

1:47:45 ↗ question I should ask you to sort of

1:47:48 ↗ help better understand that question to

1:47:51 ↗ see if there's another way to I what I'm

1:47:54 ↗ trying to get at is understand the um

1:47:56 ↗ the life cycle of the community. as our

1:47:58 ↗ community gets more expensive to live

1:47:59 ↗ in, those with families and kids,

1:48:01 ↗ they're going to move out of the area

1:48:03 ↗ and then who's going to take over those

1:48:04 ↗ larger houses that are going to have

1:48:05 ↗ families and kids in here. But that's a

1:48:07 ↗ that's a bigger issue on the east side

1:48:08 ↗ altogether, right? Um because this was

1:48:11 ↗ an affordable community when I moved

1:48:12 ↗ here 20 years ago and now it's not. So

1:48:16 ↗ you're starting to see, you know, people

1:48:17 ↗ are moving in the area, they have two

1:48:19 ↗ kids, they're going to the great school

1:48:20 ↗ system, and then the ones when their

1:48:22 ↗ kids are done, the last one leaves, they

1:48:23 ↗ either move to the Highlands or they're

1:48:24 ↗ moving to Phoenix. So, you know, it's

1:48:27 ↗ kind of a I'm just trying to get at

1:48:28 ↗ what's the inventory going to look like

1:48:30 ↗ 10 years from now, 20 years from now.

1:48:32 ↗ So, that you've raised a question I

1:48:34 ↗ often raise with cities when they're

1:48:35 ↗ doing their comp plans, which is I grew

1:48:38 ↗ up in a town that that is totally what

1:48:40 ↗ happened. Very few people stayed. We

1:48:43 ↗ were actually a third generation family,

1:48:44 ↗ but nobody else was. And that was

1:48:47 ↗ intentional. Okay, when you're done with

1:48:49 ↗ school, move on. We got a great school.

1:48:51 ↗ Let people move in. And one of the

1:48:53 ↗ questions I've because I've been here

1:48:54 ↗ since 90 asking the question and this is

1:48:56 ↗ the question in Seamish because they're

1:48:58 ↗ you 15 years ago is do you want you most

1:49:02 ↗ communities on the east side start out

1:49:04 ↗ very family orient familyheavy

1:49:07 ↗ mostly sing a lot of single family and

1:49:08 ↗ then it starts infilling and the

1:49:10 ↗ question is do you want housing options

1:49:12 ↗ for people to be able to stay in their

1:49:13 ↗ community other than staying in their

1:49:15 ↗ home and that's a consc and so you can

1:49:17 ↗ consciously decide we're not going to

1:49:18 ↗ even try to accommodate it and that I'm

1:49:20 ↗ not saying that's right or

1:49:22 ↗ you know, certain cities land on that's

1:49:24 ↗ not what we're about. And so the

1:49:25 ↗ question I always ask the community is,

1:49:27 ↗ do you want choices? So like both

1:49:30 ↗ created a senior overlay zone next to

1:49:31 ↗ their senior center and they now have

1:49:33 ↗ hundreds and hundreds of senior housing

1:49:35 ↗ units that were built all around their

1:49:36 ↗ senior center. Okay? And that was a

1:49:38 ↗ conscious decision um kind of thing. And

1:49:41 ↗ they did an overlay where senior housing

1:49:44 ↗ totally made more value for land than

1:49:46 ↗ what was the underlying zoning. So land

1:49:49 ↗ owners waited till the senior people

1:49:50 ↗ came around and wanted to build senior

1:49:52 ↗ housing. So the question is is

1:49:54 ↗ understanding what you do have for

1:49:56 ↗ senior housing is that feel like

1:49:57 ↗ proportionate or do you need you know

1:49:59 ↗ should you encourage more of that? So

1:50:01 ↗ that's the kind of question a city can

1:50:02 ↗ ask. I I I appreciate that and um

1:50:06 ↗ because that's kind of the heart of the

1:50:08 ↗ matter here as I've been grocking in my

1:50:10 ↗ head as to what is the problem statement

1:50:13 ↗ here we're trying to solve. Right? is I

1:50:15 ↗ I didn't see it on a slide actually.

1:50:17 ↗ Problem statement. I get it with after

1:50:21 ↗ all this data which is an amazing amount

1:50:23 ↗ of data.

1:50:25 ↗ Um it's hard to

1:50:28 ↗ boil it all down into a a story that

1:50:32 ↗ people can understand. Meaning, okay, um

1:50:36 ↗ the problem is we don't have enough

1:50:40 ↗ lowincome housing.

1:50:42 ↗ just saying that you're gonna have a lot

1:50:44 ↗ of people disagree with them. But then

1:50:48 ↗ back that up with this, you know, no

1:50:50 ↗ one's going to read a 40 slide, you

1:50:53 ↗ know, deck to figure that out, right?

1:50:56 ↗ They need a bullet point as to, well,

1:50:57 ↗ here's why it's a problem. And

1:51:01 ↗ which I get there eventually,

1:51:04 ↗ but it's hard following, you know, it's

1:51:07 ↗ hard to get there and it's hard to a

1:51:09 ↗ little bit to believe. And so to your

1:51:11 ↗ comment about the senior citizen thing,

1:51:13 ↗ that was a conscious decision. It's kind

1:51:15 ↗ of like, well, I think the city council

1:51:18 ↗ has taken a decision that okay, well, we

1:51:21 ↗ do want lowincome housing.

1:51:26 ↗ I think that's what they're saying. We

1:51:28 ↗ need more of it. That is a decision

1:51:31 ↗ they've made or that is a conscious

1:51:32 ↗ decision that they've made or not made,

1:51:35 ↗ I guess. How do you how do you think

1:51:36 ↗ that they made that decision? I'm I'm

1:51:38 ↗ asking actually. Oh, you're asking if

1:51:40 ↗ they have. No, we're doing this housing

1:51:42 ↗ strategy right now to determine

1:51:43 ↗ determine if it's a problem or not. And

1:51:46 ↗ when you say low income, I mean, again,

1:51:47 ↗ we're talking about income affordability

1:51:49 ↗ across the range, right? We're talking

1:51:50 ↗ about actually if you look at the

1:51:51 ↗ numbers about 600 units were short

1:51:55 ↗ or the numbers could be interpreted

1:51:57 ↗ differently if you look at overall, but

1:52:00 ↗ am I right? Is that about right though?

1:52:02 ↗ About you know, if if you look at from

1:52:04 ↗ the that time period and how we measured

1:52:07 ↗ needs back then. Correct. Right. That is

1:52:09 ↗ correct. Now, but let me can I take your

1:52:12 ↗ point and because you you've made some

1:52:13 ↗ really really important points and it's

1:52:15 ↗ almost like you set up the last question

1:52:18 ↗ here because to me I agree that if you

1:52:23 ↗ can boil it down to and I sort we were

1:52:26 ↗ using the term vision. What's the vision

1:52:28 ↗ of what you want your community to have

1:52:31 ↗ and calling out areas where you think

1:52:33 ↗ you may not be achieving things for the

1:52:36 ↗ housing. In other words, what would

1:52:37 ↗ create a good balance in your community,

1:52:40 ↗ however you think that feels. And it

1:52:42 ↗ isn't lowinccome to me. That's not a

1:52:45 ↗ word to me. I'd rather hear things like

1:52:49 ↗ what you said the se you know types of

1:52:51 ↗ households in particular because if I

1:52:53 ↗ say let's and income levels. So that's

1:52:56 ↗ where you see what the employers are

1:52:57 ↗ saying. For us it's 40 to 60,000 would

1:52:59 ↗ be really helpful and we would like to

1:53:02 ↗ see some twobedrooms and stuff. So,

1:53:04 ↗ we're trying to have you as a community

1:53:06 ↗ do exactly what you're saying using

1:53:08 ↗ terminology that makes sense to you. And

1:53:11 ↗ so, that's why I put this up here is I

1:53:13 ↗ was hoping this might make it a little

1:53:15 ↗ easier for you to talk about where you

1:53:18 ↗ want to go by talking about types of

1:53:20 ↗ households and income levels. And then

1:53:24 ↗ once we get that identified, then we'll

1:53:25 ↗ start thinking about because you'll say,

1:53:27 ↗ "Oh, wow. If that's what we're doing,

1:53:29 ↗ which of these tool where should we try

1:53:31 ↗ to plug in tools to help get there?"

1:53:33 ↗ Right.

1:53:35 ↗ And this is very complex and I

1:53:36 ↗ appreciate the work being done here.

1:53:38 ↗ It's uh and if I what I get from it is

1:53:43 ↗ that well um

1:53:46 ↗ first of all most people in this

1:53:47 ↗ community are not business owners.

1:53:49 ↗ Right. Exactly. Yep. Um they're driving

1:53:53 ↗ to Redmond or Seattle

1:53:56 ↗ or Belleview. uh you know so it will be

1:54:01 ↗ hard for people to without without uh

1:54:04 ↗ you know pretty short sleeve English

1:54:07 ↗ saying hey this is a problem and why for

1:54:09 ↗ some local business owners you know we

1:54:12 ↗ need a couple few hundred more units for

1:54:15 ↗ people can work here and by the way you

1:54:17 ↗ do that and you're going to solve a

1:54:19 ↗ little bit of the traffic problems

1:54:21 ↗ but uh and that that story makes sense

1:54:25 ↗ to me more you

1:54:28 ↗ Um, if we can piece together four or

1:54:31 ↗ five more stories like that, that would

1:54:33 ↗ help a lot. So, we only did the

1:54:35 ↗ business, not because we think that's

1:54:36 ↗ the primary driver. It's a big driver.

1:54:39 ↗ Well, I'm on the Economic Vitality

1:54:41 ↗ Commission, so that's that's where my

1:54:43 ↗ head's coming and that's who we've

1:54:44 ↗ talked to so far, but we're going to

1:54:45 ↗ talk to other players in the community

1:54:47 ↗ and you. So, that's a good example

1:54:49 ↗ though, what we gave you of the kind of

1:54:51 ↗ stories we're looking for from you. Now

1:54:53 ↗ we're ready to if you have thoughts on

1:54:55 ↗ that right now of you know thinking

1:54:58 ↗ about we we started talking about the

1:55:00 ↗ seniors a little bit you know we would

1:55:02 ↗ like to see housing for seniors who are

1:55:05 ↗ on fixed income be able to have options

1:55:08 ↗ that are attached or with service you

1:55:10 ↗ know those are the kind of stories we're

1:55:11 ↗ looking for and we'll try to match up

1:55:14 ↗ data to help document why that might be

1:55:17 ↗ important or not but to some extent you

1:55:20 ↗ live in this community the stories we're

1:55:22 ↗ telling telling you about up on here are

1:55:24 ↗ probably reinforcing things you probably

1:55:26 ↗ already have in your heads or know

1:55:27 ↗ about. And so the better we can do of

1:55:30 ↗ telling a story in a way that not only

1:55:32 ↗ you but the broader community gets, the

1:55:35 ↗ more likely it will be that oh then

1:55:36 ↗ let's do something about it. And to

1:55:38 ↗ Ethan's point, um you can tell the story

1:55:41 ↗ but then put the price tag next to it.

1:55:43 ↗ Yes. Exactly.

1:55:46 ↗ Actually like what he said about the

1:55:47 ↗ vision statement. So, you got me kind of

1:55:49 ↗ thinking,

1:55:51 ↗ you're asking us basically to come up

1:55:54 ↗ with a vision statement. What do we want

1:55:56 ↗ our affordable housing vision look like

1:55:59 ↗ moving forward? Take one word out of

1:56:01 ↗ there, affordable. That's a part of your

1:56:03 ↗ housing vision. That's not this focal

1:56:04 ↗ point alone. Okay. So, you want

1:56:08 ↗ what do we want our housing vision to

1:56:11 ↗ look like moving forward? Yes. That's

1:56:13 ↗ the Yep.

1:56:17 ↗ And then so we come up with what we like

1:56:20 ↗ it to look like and then you'll come up

1:56:21 ↗ with the solution on how to get it.

1:56:24 ↗ We'll come up with ideas for No, no.

1:56:26 ↗ We're we're going to come up with ideas

1:56:27 ↗ for you to think about to see if they're

1:56:29 ↗ worth solutions in your community.

1:56:32 ↗ Okay. We're going to give you some

1:56:33 ↗ options. I have an idea I've been baking

1:56:35 ↗ for a while and I was actually going to

1:56:37 ↗ talk to city council about it. Um, but

1:56:39 ↗ one of the thoughts was uh open up a uh

1:56:43 ↗ a program with uh first responders

1:56:47 ↗ where the city could go in and pay a

1:56:49 ↗ portion of um a house or a condo if they

1:56:53 ↗ purchased and then we would have

1:56:56 ↗ ownership stake in that property. So

1:56:58 ↗ when it comes time to sell, we would get

1:57:01 ↗ proceeds, a profit of that portion. Um,

1:57:05 ↗ is that the kind of solution that you're

1:57:07 ↗ looking for us to come up with kind of

1:57:09 ↗ ideas? That is definitely the kind of

1:57:11 ↗ ideas that can be put out there. Yes.

1:57:14 ↗ And that's a little more outside the

1:57:15 ↗ box, but that's ex, you know, we can be

1:57:16 ↗ in the box and out of the box, right?

1:57:19 ↗ Exactly. And I have to run to another

1:57:21 ↗ city to have a similar conversation with

1:57:23 ↗ their planning commission. So Jen will

1:57:25 ↗ be here to help keep the conversation

1:57:27 ↗ going, but I'll be back on the other as

1:57:29 ↗ you move forward and appreciate all your

1:57:31 ↗ questions and comments tonight. So thank

1:57:34 ↗ you. Thank you.

1:57:38 ↗ So, I could take a Yeah, go for it.

1:57:41 ↗ crack at a very vague but uh uh maybe uh

1:57:45 ↗ something to get us started on a vision

1:57:47 ↗ statement. I think for me it's I

1:57:51 ↗ there's something around I'd like uh our

1:57:53 ↗ housing mix to better reflect the u mix

1:57:56 ↗ of people that actually uh work here.

1:58:00 ↗ It doesn't have to match it exactly, but

1:58:02 ↗ it seems pretty far off that sort of

1:58:04 ↗ people that work here generally can't

1:58:06 ↗ afford to live here was my takeaway.

1:58:08 ↗ Yeah. Um and it seems like it's gotten

1:58:10 ↗ worse. And so to me, it's, you know, if

1:58:13 ↗ there's something about stability in a

1:58:15 ↗ community, if everyone that works there

1:58:16 ↗ like leaves it when the sun goes down

1:58:18 ↗ and everyone that lives there comes

1:58:20 ↗ back, that just seems like not maybe the

1:58:22 ↗ uh That's good. you know, just in a very

1:58:26 ↗ kind of idealistic sense, not not my uh

1:58:28 ↗ picture of a community, right? Well, I

1:58:30 ↗ think you you have to temper that

1:58:32 ↗ somewhat with uh we have an inordinate

1:58:35 ↗ uh retail presence for our you for the

1:58:39 ↗ population. So, we're never going to

1:58:41 ↗ come near. Yeah. I said better, not

1:58:43 ↗ exact. Okay. Yeah. Yes. Anna, when you

1:58:47 ↗ mentioned the focus groups that you're

1:58:49 ↗ going to have um you know the business

1:58:50 ↗ school district service providers you

1:58:52 ↗ seniors and realtors

1:58:54 ↗ have you thought of how to target a

1:58:57 ↗ broader community participation with

1:59:00 ↗ several languages and interpreters

1:59:03 ↗ that will bring their cultural

1:59:06 ↗ background ideas and their specific

1:59:08 ↗ needs because sometimes

1:59:11 ↗ we're missing some links in the whole

1:59:14 ↗ puzzle. That's a great idea. I think we

1:59:15 ↗ will hit some of that with the service

1:59:17 ↗ providers and we also talked a little

1:59:18 ↗ bit with the school district but um I

1:59:20 ↗ think that's not um that's on our

1:59:22 ↗ current list but that's definitely a

1:59:23 ↗ great idea. Thank you.

1:59:26 ↗ Go ahead. I've got another one. Okay,

1:59:29 ↗ good. I'm taking another shot based on

1:59:31 ↗ uh Richard's feedback. Um so I think the

1:59:33 ↗ other one would be if you think about a

1:59:35 ↗ community, it's a place where people can

1:59:37 ↗ grow up and live and potentially when

1:59:40 ↗ they you know finish school maybe stay.

1:59:44 ↗ Um it doesn't seem like that's realistic

1:59:46 ↗ for someone leaving our wonderful

1:59:48 ↗ schools at this point in time, right?

1:59:51 ↗ Unless they're, you know, winning the

1:59:54 ↗ lottery in terms of the job market,

1:59:55 ↗ which some will, but a lot won't. It

1:59:57 ↗ seems like you kind of have to leave as

2:00:00 ↗ a recent high school grad or even a

2:00:02 ↗ recent college grad. So, um a mix of

2:00:04 ↗ housing that allows people to, you know,

2:00:08 ↗ be born, live, and and grow old here.

2:00:11 ↗ So, any stage of life. Yeah. Mhm. Not

2:00:13 ↗ that they they have to, but there's an

2:00:15 ↗ opportunity allowing for that. I kind of

2:00:18 ↗ disagree with that though.

2:00:21 ↗ That's why this is what a conversation.

2:00:23 ↗ I kind of think of Isiqua as a bedroom

2:00:26 ↗ community. You come here for great

2:00:27 ↗ schools and uh I I am not going to stay

2:00:30 ↗ here after my kids graduate. So, okay.

2:00:33 ↗ And so, and I'm not looking for housing

2:00:35 ↗ to stay here actually. But if I might,

2:00:37 ↗ but what if your kids wanted to? Would

2:00:39 ↗ you want them to be able to have the

2:00:41 ↗ option to? My kids don't want to live

2:00:42 ↗ near me. No. Well, maybe when you move

2:00:45 ↗ to Arizona, they can live here. But

2:00:48 ↗ anyway, this is the kind of discussion

2:00:51 ↗ that would, you know, can go on forever.

2:00:53 ↗ But it's definitely healthy to have

2:00:56 ↗ because people have an idea about, you

2:00:58 ↗ know, where they live and their town,

2:00:59 ↗ why they live there and what it could

2:01:00 ↗ be, should be. So, um, I'm not I'm not

2:01:04 ↗ dis disagreeing or anything really. I'm

2:01:06 ↗ just saying it it's I'm not sure there's

2:01:09 ↗ going to be a, you know, that's why we

2:01:11 ↗ vote for people to come in and and make

2:01:13 ↗ a decision, you know, to help represent

2:01:15 ↗ us all. So, it's it's going to be hard,

2:01:18 ↗ right? Yeah. Well, and I think you are

2:01:20 ↗ representing our community in this

2:01:21 ↗ conversation as well. And so, you're

2:01:22 ↗ helping to shape it. It doesn't mean

2:01:24 ↗ you're helping completely decide it, but

2:01:26 ↗ you're helping us as staff. We're coming

2:01:28 ↗ with data. We're coming with some

2:01:29 ↗ experience from other uh voices, but

2:01:31 ↗ we're hoping that the combination of who

2:01:33 ↗ we have here tonight helps us again to

2:01:36 ↗ make it match and make it fit our

2:01:38 ↗ community. One of the things that uh

2:01:40 ↗ gives a community character is a sense

2:01:42 ↗ of history. And when I moved here, there

2:01:46 ↗ were still a great many families who

2:01:48 ↗ were sort of like the pioneer families

2:01:52 ↗ of the area.

2:01:54 ↗ And it I think it would be a great loss

2:01:56 ↗ to the community if their children,

2:01:58 ↗ grandchildren, and great-grandchildren

2:02:00 ↗ were not able to stay in the community

2:02:03 ↗ because we lose a a sense of who we are

2:02:08 ↗ and who we've been if families aren't

2:02:11 ↗ able to to stay for generations. Sure.

2:02:15 ↗ Again, I think it's a choice, right?

2:02:16 ↗ Like you said. So, so, um, I agree this

2:02:19 ↗ conversation probably go on for another

2:02:20 ↗ four hours. Um, and so one of the things

2:02:22 ↗ I want to be cognizant of time. It's um

2:02:24 ↗ a little after 8 and we have public

2:02:25 ↗ comment yet. Um are there any other

2:02:27 ↗ comments, burning comments? What we I

2:02:29 ↗ think we're going to do is actually send

2:02:31 ↗ you out some questions to think about

2:02:32 ↗ and respond to. Um again, this is a

2:02:35 ↗ conversation. This is the beginning.

2:02:36 ↗ This is uh the opportunity and we can

2:02:39 ↗ talk about having additional meetings.

2:02:41 ↗ We plan on having one in January. Um a

2:02:43 ↗ special meeting again of the three

2:02:45 ↗ commissions. Um we have to figure out

2:02:47 ↗ schedules, but we're looking about the

2:02:49 ↗ third or fourth week of January. Um but

2:02:52 ↗ if there are things that you'd like to

2:02:53 ↗ have smaller conversations with or other

2:02:55 ↗ things um let us know. There is going to

2:02:57 ↗ be again uh focus groups and we'll look

2:03:00 ↗ to have an representative from the

2:03:01 ↗ commissions at those to again inform and

2:03:03 ↗ help share with your other you know your

2:03:05 ↗ other commission members. So is there

2:03:07 ↗ anything else that you want to share

2:03:09 ↗ tonight? Yeah, Anna, can those slides be

2:03:12 ↗ made available so we can refresh the

2:03:13 ↗ information and Yes. Thank you. Yes. One

2:03:16 ↗ last as far as the focus groups. Do we

2:03:19 ↗ have any uh high school kids that would

2:03:21 ↗ be involved in that focus group? There's

2:03:23 ↗ a youth group. Yeah. Okay. Excellent.

2:03:25 ↗ Yeah. So, nice. And if you know anybody

2:03:27 ↗ who we should include because a lot of

2:03:30 ↗ you um a lot of it is about having the

2:03:32 ↗ right people in the room, right? So, you

2:03:33 ↗ want about five to seven people who have

2:03:35 ↗ an interest and not you're pulling out

2:03:37 ↗ information but that have an interest.

2:03:38 ↗ Now, they don't have to be advocates,

2:03:40 ↗ experts, whatever, but you want them to

2:03:42 ↗ have um an un uh a story to tell or kind

2:03:45 ↗ of some information that would be

2:03:46 ↗ helpful to our stories, to our process.

2:03:49 ↗ So, if there's somebody that you think

2:03:50 ↗ should be in one of those focus groups,

2:03:52 ↗ please let the staff person know and

2:03:55 ↗ we'll make sure that we reach out to

2:03:56 ↗ them. So,

2:03:59 ↗ okay. So, we again, we will send you

2:04:00 ↗ some more homework and we appreciate the

2:04:02 ↗ conversation today. It's just the

2:04:04 ↗ beginning. you will get um and actually

2:04:06 ↗ I think uh Arthur's slideshow actually

2:04:09 ↗ has more data beyond the 17 slides he

2:04:12 ↗ shows. So when you get it, check it out.

2:04:14 ↗ It has two blank slides and then you'll

2:04:15 ↗ have some more information to look at.

2:04:16 ↗ We'll make sure we'll actually probably

2:04:18 ↗ maybe post that so then people can

2:04:20 ↗ access as as well. And so um we can go

2:04:23 ↗ right into public comment. Just one more

2:04:26 ↗ question. Did your uh big business focus

2:04:30 ↗ group include uh developers, real estate

2:04:33 ↗ agents, and those people you've listed

2:04:35 ↗ over there? I think we need a focus

2:04:37 ↗ group with them. We we do plan actually

2:04:39 ↗ once we have some some of the

2:04:41 ↗ strategies. We think that's a a better

2:04:43 ↗ place to get their feedback on it

2:04:45 ↗ because is this realistic, right? We may

2:04:47 ↗ sit in this room and we have as many

2:04:48 ↗ conversations and look at data. Um then

2:04:50 ↗ we need to have some that and we do have

2:04:52 ↗ some of those people in our room here in

2:04:54 ↗ our economic vitality commission. But

2:04:56 ↗ yes, we think they're they're definitely

2:04:57 ↗ play a role in that. And we do have a

2:04:58 ↗ real estate brokers um uh group as well,

2:05:02 ↗ a realtor. So yeah, thank you. Okay.

2:05:04 ↗ Anything else? So public there is there

2:05:06 ↗ any public comment? Yes, you've come up.

2:05:17 ↗ It's only a computer.

2:05:26 ↗ My name is Mary Lynch and I reside at

2:05:28 ↗ 2690 Northwest Oakrest Drive, Isiqua,

2:05:30 ↗ Washington. And I also was a member of

2:05:33 ↗ the central area um task force. And part

2:05:37 ↗ of the vision that we heard from the

2:05:39 ↗ community then was there was a desire uh

2:05:43 ↗ back then of people to be able to age in

2:05:46 ↗ place and to be able to downsize and age

2:05:48 ↗ in place. And part of the strategy we

2:05:50 ↗ had was that's why we saw mixed use

2:05:52 ↗ would allow you to with that mixed use

2:05:55 ↗ have apartments and smaller places that

2:05:57 ↗ were above uh grocery stores,

2:06:00 ↗ restaurants schools

2:06:03 ↗ um that would allow people to age in

2:06:06 ↗ place. I personally would love to age in

2:06:08 ↗ place, but I can't stay here. It it's

2:06:10 ↗ it's totally outpriced itself and in my

2:06:12 ↗ lifetime I'm not sure we're going to get

2:06:14 ↗ affordable housing so I could stay. Um,

2:06:17 ↗ but I know in talking with the police,

2:06:19 ↗ um, Bob, uh, Porter said he only had two

2:06:22 ↗ of his officers that lived in town. The

2:06:24 ↗ rest couldn't afford to. Um, I know with

2:06:27 ↗ the schools, one of the decisions that

2:06:30 ↗ they make on whether they're going to

2:06:31 ↗ open schools or not, if the roads are

2:06:33 ↗ bad, is how bad are the outline areas?

2:06:36 ↗ Because the majority of our teachers all

2:06:39 ↗ live extremely long distances from here.

2:06:42 ↗ Um, a lot of the school bus drivers live

2:06:44 ↗ a little bit closer because they're

2:06:46 ↗ older and they can afford to live here

2:06:48 ↗ or have homes right now. Um, so they can

2:06:52 ↗ get there, but that's not the issue.

2:06:54 ↗ It's can the teachers get to school

2:06:56 ↗ because they can't open the schools if

2:06:58 ↗ they don't have enough teachers to open

2:06:59 ↗ up the school. So that's another issue

2:07:02 ↗ is is they can't afford to live here.

2:07:04 ↗ Um, one of the projects that I've talked

2:07:06 ↗ about before is the greenhouse project,

2:07:10 ↗ which is a totally different concept of

2:07:12 ↗ housing than what was talked here

2:07:13 ↗ tonight. But those are little cottages

2:07:17 ↗ um that may have just little cottages

2:07:20 ↗ with one central kitchen. That is a

2:07:23 ↗ national and beginning to be

2:07:24 ↗ international way of allowing older

2:07:27 ↗ people or people single to live in a

2:07:30 ↗ little community and have a community.

2:07:33 ↗ And so that's where you need to look at

2:07:35 ↗ maybe changing policies. Um I know um

2:07:39 ↗ Elizabeth has talked about, you know,

2:07:40 ↗ more of a boarding house style. So

2:07:42 ↗ there's other types of homes and what

2:07:44 ↗ you've talked about that I hope going

2:07:45 ↗ forward that you consider and looking

2:07:48 ↗ at. Um and I really stress with also

2:07:51 ↗ policy is we ought to have schools where

2:07:54 ↗ people can live above them, whether they

2:07:56 ↗ be teachers or whatever. And that's

2:07:58 ↗ going to be forming more strategic

2:08:00 ↗ partners. and hopefully this group can

2:08:02 ↗ help some of those partnerships form.

2:08:04 ↗ Thank you.

2:08:14 ↗ So, my name's Connie Marsh and uh this

2:08:18 ↗ is more

2:08:21 ↗ things I think are missing. And so in my

2:08:25 ↗ brain, I see this as the gentrification

2:08:27 ↗ of the suburbs.

2:08:29 ↗ Um, we're changing forms and we're

2:08:33 ↗ kicking out some of our affordable

2:08:35 ↗ housing that was pre-existing and we're

2:08:37 ↗ actually creating more dense housing

2:08:40 ↗ that is more expensive than the existing

2:08:43 ↗ housing and so that I think we have that

2:08:47 ↗ data um how many lowerriced units are

2:08:52 ↗ going away as we develop highpriced

2:08:56 ↗ units. So, we are actually eroding our

2:08:58 ↗ affordable housing. Um, so I didn't see

2:09:02 ↗ that there. Uh, also

2:09:07 ↗ for King County, um, I don't think

2:09:10 ↗ you're going to even be able to solve

2:09:11 ↗ the problem of allowing people to live

2:09:13 ↗ in King County and work in King County,

2:09:16 ↗ much less live in Isiqua and work in

2:09:18 ↗ Isqua and age in place in Isqua. I think

2:09:21 ↗ the conversation needs to be broadened

2:09:24 ↗ to surrounding counties because that is

2:09:26 ↗ where people are commuting from. And I

2:09:29 ↗ don't think the vision is how do we

2:09:32 ↗ create this in place for Isiqua. I think

2:09:36 ↗ it is how do you make people be able to

2:09:43 ↗ get their employees live in places that

2:09:46 ↗ are safe and healthful and and live

2:09:50 ↗ successfully while doing what they need

2:09:53 ↗ to do and want to do in Isiqua, which is

2:09:56 ↗ a a much broader

2:10:00 ↗ vision because I don't think the vision

2:10:02 ↗ that you're asking for is solvable. So,

2:10:05 ↗ I would like to see something that is

2:10:07 ↗ that is more uh has a higher chance of

2:10:10 ↗ success. Okay. So, I would see if you

2:10:13 ↗ could maybe broaden I want to see Pierce

2:10:16 ↗ County statistics. I want to know why I

2:10:18 ↗ can buy a house in Auburn for a third of

2:10:21 ↗ the prices in Isiqua and it's cuter than

2:10:24 ↗ most of the places in Isiqua.

2:10:28 ↗ It's just in Auburn. So, that's why

2:10:30 ↗ people are commuting from Auburn to

2:10:31 ↗ here. Oh. Oh, I digress. So,

2:10:35 ↗ uh, I've been reading some literature

2:10:36 ↗ from some other places, and some of the

2:10:38 ↗ ways that other places are looking at

2:10:40 ↗ their issues is they're looking at

2:10:42 ↗ commuting sheds and trying to figure out

2:10:45 ↗ how to actually move the people to where

2:10:47 ↗ they need to go as compared to how to

2:10:50 ↗ house them in their areas. So, instead

2:10:52 ↗ of um uh instead of putting people in

2:10:56 ↗ place, it's the motion of people. And I

2:10:59 ↗ don't know if that makes sense to you or

2:11:01 ↗ not. If you I didn't see the statistics

2:11:04 ↗ on um

2:11:07 ↗ whether our housing prices have gone

2:11:09 ↗ down as we have added more houses. I

2:11:11 ↗ mean I know the answer to that. Uh but I

2:11:14 ↗ think those statistics need to be in

2:11:16 ↗ here because the supply and demand in

2:11:18 ↗ this situation

2:11:19 ↗ um is an important question. Has that

2:11:21 ↗ been working? And then of course I want

2:11:24 ↗ to see what other people have done to be

2:11:26 ↗ successful in trying to solve these

2:11:28 ↗ problems. And really it's an unsolvable

2:11:30 ↗ problem. So, I don't think you're going

2:11:32 ↗ to find success. You might find helpful

2:11:35 ↗ suggestions, but I also want some input

2:11:38 ↗ on on ideas from other people who've

2:11:41 ↗ already done it. And uh okay, I only

2:11:45 ↗ have a little bit more. Um

2:11:49 ↗ am I going to skip that one? Skip that

2:11:52 ↗ one. Ah, our form of solving affordable

2:11:56 ↗ housing in the past. So, what has Isiqua

2:11:58 ↗ done in the past itself that was

2:12:01 ↗ successful and unsuccessful? We had

2:12:03 ↗ $50,000 that we were trying to create

2:12:06 ↗ some sort of uh center for help for

2:12:09 ↗ those who were low income and that just

2:12:11 ↗ sort of went away. It never happened.

2:12:13 ↗ Why not? We've had a land land in the

2:12:15 ↗ Isqua Highlands that was slated for

2:12:18 ↗ affordable housing. It's never happened.

2:12:20 ↗ Why not? And so, what can we learn from

2:12:23 ↗ our mistakes?

2:12:25 ↗ And there we go. I'm at the end. Thank

2:12:28 ↗ you very much.

2:12:35 ↗ Thank you very much. Anybody other

2:12:36 ↗ public comments? Okay. And with that, I

2:12:40 ↗ guess I will adjourn the group. Thank

2:12:42 ↗ you very much everybody for coming

2:12:43 ↗ together in this conversation.

Minutes for this meeting haven't been published yet. Council and committee minutes are approved at the next meeting and embedded as a consent-calendar attachment in that meeting's agenda packet — they will appear here once that next packet is processed.