← Back to City Council Digest

Meeting concluded — minutes pending. The agenda below is what the City posted; minutes haven't been published yet. Issaquah approves Council minutes at the next meeting and ships them embedded in that next meeting's packet, so they typically land here 1–3 weeks after the meeting. Transcript and recording will appear once the City posts the YouTube video and our pipeline catches it.
Planning Policy Commission Auto captions

Thursday, March 5, 2015

6:30 PM · 1h 22m · Council Chambers, 135 East Sunset Way, Issaquah WA
Topics tracked across meetings:
PUBLIC HEARING: Proposed Amendments to Issaquah Municipal Code Regarding Accessory Dwelling Units, (R) 2/7
2015 Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Map Amendments AB 6955 3/5
Section
1. CALL TO ORDER
1a
Commission Membership
packet pp.2
Staff report:
Planning Policy Commission About Contacts Created in 1983, this commission serves as a policy advisory body to the Mayor and provides guidance and direction for Issaquah’s Staff Liaison future growth through continued review and improvement to the Trish Heinonen, Planning City’s Comprehensive Land Use Plan and related land use Manager documents. Email
2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
2a
Minutes of January 22, 2015
packet pp.3–4
Staff report:
CITY OF ISSAQUAH PLANNING POLICY COMMISSION MINUTES
3. AGENDA ITEMS
3a
PUBLIC HEARING: Proposed 2015 Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Map Amendments
Trish Heinonen, Planning Manager · packet pp.5–309
Topics: Land Use
Staff report:
Issaquah’s Comprehensive Plan has not undergone a Periodic Update since 2006, however individual pieces of the Plan are updated each year. Periodic Updates are mandated by the State, and this Update is due to the State by the end of June, 2015. The Planning Policy Commission (PPC) is charged with the public process for review and
0:39 good evening and welcome to the March
0:43 5th meeting of the planning policy
0:46 commission I want to um thank all of you
0:49 for coming it's really exciting to see
0:51 real people in the audience so um thank
0:54 you very much uh the first thing on our
0:56 agenda is the approval minutes of the
0:58 January 22nd
1:01 meeting do I have a motion to
1:05 approve do I have a second second is
1:08 there any discussion
1:10 changes hearing none all those in favor
1:14 of approving the minutes please say I I
1:21 opposed tonight we're going to continue
1:24 on our last leg
1:27 of uh of discussing the a comp plan and
1:31 first on the agenda is Trish and she's
1:34 going to update us on the changes and
1:36 what's going on so Trish please take
1:38 away and I'll um pay special attention
1:40 to the redesignation reone letters that
1:43 I bet most of you received and that's
1:45 why you're here um so we'll be able to
1:47 to explain a little bit about that and
1:49 um and where we go from here and what
1:51 comments you have on that um today is um
1:54 a big day for you all um as Joan
1:57 mentioned we're updating the
1:59 comprehensive plan and this commission
2:01 has been working on it since last May um
2:04 other commissions have been helping us
2:06 with this and so tonight's goals are to
2:09 understand the changes that are being
2:11 proposed um to understand which plans
2:13 and policies are being Incorporated in
2:16 this update to understand that the
2:19 proposed rezones and red designations to
2:21 get all of your input and comments and
2:24 questions that you might have and
2:25 hopefully if you're able to to make a
2:27 recommendation to the city council those
2:30 are our goals for
2:31 tonight um the public process that you
2:34 all have gone through um includes not
2:36 only your review of um since last May of
2:40 all the elements you've seen them all at
2:42 least twice um up till tonight um the
2:45 other commissions that have helped you
2:47 the park board has looked at the parks
2:49 recreation trails and open space element
2:52 the Human Services Commission has looked
2:54 at the Human Services element and the
2:56 housing element the Arts commission has
2:58 looked at the cultural plan element and
3:01 the economic Vitality commission has
3:03 looked at the um economic Vitality
3:06 element and in addition I almost forgot
3:08 the Historical Society has looked also
3:10 looked at the cultural element so you've
3:12 had a lot of help you've had a lot of
3:14 stakeholders looking at the pieces and
3:16 parts to see how best they all fit in um
3:20 over a thousand letters were sent about
3:22 their rezones and uh redesignation
3:24 proposals um they went to all the
3:27 adjacent Property Owners to the 31
3:29 proposed Community facilities rezones
3:32 and to the cren Lane proposal and the
3:36 Emer um Talis proposal and so that was
3:39 over a thousand letters went out um to
3:42 let them know of tonight's meeting so
3:44 that they can comment and find out more
3:46 about it um so we've there's been a lot
3:50 Outreach um the significant changes um
3:53 document wide um we tried to remove
3:57 policies that were more implementation
3:58 in nature versus policies to make it a
4:02 shorter policy document which is it's
4:04 supposed to be a policy document we're
4:06 going to come back next year with the
4:07 implementation strategy so that um those
4:11 are um sort of more doable actionable um
4:15 measurable kinds of things whereas the
4:16 policies are more
4:18 aspirational so that was a change um we
4:21 removed a lot of the background
4:22 information that is you know no longer
4:24 relevant or it's old a lot of these
4:26 Amendment elements we hadn't updated
4:28 since we first wrote them just because
4:30 of timing we haven't been able to get
4:32 back to them we hope that we've made it
4:34 more user friendly because it's more
4:37 concise and clear and we've taken a lot
4:40 of the policies from the central plan
4:42 that we worked so hard on for so many
4:44 years as a community and we put those
4:46 into the whole city um some of those are
4:48 technology some of the pedestrian
4:50 friendly Mobility pieces um our Citywide
4:54 proposed now and uh some of the
4:56 sustainability pieces and of course the
4:58 growth targets um are Incorporated
5:00 Citywide that we uh adopted for the
5:03 central um Urban
5:05 Corp the vision 2040 document of the
5:08 region we were required by the state um
5:11 to do a comparison to show that we are
5:13 in consistent we are consistent with the
5:16 regional plan so that's a new piece of
5:18 this um the land use element has the
5:21 updated growth targets the updated
5:23 population the goals about natural
5:25 resources we also took all the existing
5:28 conditions that we sort of just
5:30 discussed we talked about the Urban Tree
5:32 canopy and climate change and our carbon
5:34 footprint and it there was just this big
5:37 discussion but they weren't connected to
5:39 policy so we took all the discussion and
5:41 we actually put it into the policy so
5:43 that we could refer to it and council
5:45 could use those as decisionmaking um
5:48 guidance instead of just sort of being a
5:50 descriptive um piece of the um of the
5:53 issue so we think that'll make it a more
5:55 user friendly
5:56 document the housing element had a lot
5:59 of good changes we had some help again
6:01 from Human Services um commission and
6:04 Arch that we work with um we updated a
6:07 lot of the information we talked about
6:09 how infill should be um more compatible
6:13 with what's what the existing
6:14 neighborhood is like um we're going to
6:17 create a housing strategy plan for
6:18 implementation next year to help us um
6:21 meet our housing goals um we added that
6:24 language about pedestrian friendliness
6:25 and
6:26 walkability um and again we put the
6:28 housing targets and the housing goals
6:30 from the central plan we incorporated
6:32 that as well with them uh remembering
6:35 too though that we have to have a jobs
6:36 housing balance to to help us with our
6:38 transportation goals as
6:41 well Transportation element we just came
6:44 out of the council's concurrency update
6:47 that took a good long time and a lot of
6:49 public Outreach for that that
6:51 information has been included you had a
6:53 couple of presentations from the
6:55 concurrency folks to help us with that
6:58 the Walk and Roll pedestrian
7:00 um Mobility plan action strategy has
7:03 been Incorporated we added the Central
7:05 isqua Transportation pieces into this
7:07 and we also added the policy that'll
7:09 help us towards that Master the mobility
7:12 master plan next
7:14 year um there are a few Transportation
7:18 um um tweaks that we made um just this
7:22 last week when we realized that sound
7:24 transit has yet another long range plan
7:27 of which we're happy to be incl included
7:29 in another one so that it's always good
7:32 and so we included that um mentioning
7:34 that as well as um the maps where were
7:38 again mentioned um this helps us in our
7:40 goal as a regional growth Center and it
7:42 helps us in our goal of someday having
7:44 light rail out here um so we're always
7:47 happy when the region um agrees with us
7:49 on that so um so these have come in
7:52 since the packet went out and we can if
7:54 you have questions we can spend more
7:55 time on
7:56 this um um another another lovely map
8:00 that has us on the
8:02 map utilities um it was pretty easy
8:06 update we added some new recycling
8:08 information and we updated the
8:10 technology piece technology piece to be
8:12 consistent with Central isqua Parks and
8:15 Rec um had a nice overhaul including the
8:18 um inventory piece because they're doing
8:20 their big overhaul this next year so
8:23 this was sort of the precursor to that
8:25 for them for the parks department and
8:27 the park board so uh we got we got the
8:30 best of of their work on that I was
8:31 really happy that they were working on
8:34 that economic Vitality is a lot shorter
8:38 uh this time because they based the
8:40 economic Vitality commission based it on
8:42 the Strategic plan they just finished
8:44 they took a lot of policies out that
8:46 were covered in other places one was the
8:49 uh the CBD Central business district
8:51 plan um uh policies because they're
8:54 updating that they've got an Oldtown um
8:58 um Task Force if if you will a council
9:00 goal is to bring more Vitality into the
9:02 Oldtown area which is where we are now
9:05 and so they wanted to remove that policy
9:07 so it doesn't H hinder or uh put a
9:10 barrier into what they may choose to do
9:12 or what direction they might
9:16 go the cultural element had a lot of
9:18 really good additions um they talked
9:22 about um partnering with the high school
9:24 for the efficient use of the Performing
9:26 Arts Center they talked about U more
9:28 enforcement of the architectural design
9:30 standards in the CBD which is where we
9:32 are uh they talked about um supporting
9:35 and promoting local talent and to Foster
9:38 greater understanding of our past and
9:40 present and our heritage and it also
9:43 added policies regarding historic
9:45 preservation um um recognizing that we
9:48 do have an interlocal agreement with
9:49 King County to help us with our
9:51 preservation um
9:55 efforts the Human Service elements gets
9:57 the prize for adding the most uh goals
10:00 and policies um most of these were
10:02 required um by the state but um some of
10:05 them were just really good ideas and um
10:08 help us with our emerging issues of um
10:10 Aging in place um non-english-speaking
10:14 um citizens in our um Community uh
10:17 public transportation uh Americans with
10:20 Disabilities to get more Ada um
10:23 compatible um functionality out there
10:25 and utility assistance programs this was
10:28 all really good oh and the sustainable
10:30 food access was a a a requirement this
10:33 was a really good update to this element
10:35 it was it was good to finally spend some
10:37 some good time on this
10:39 one and last but not least the capital
10:41 facilities element takes the city's
10:43 level of service for fire police um
10:47 Municipal facilities and matches it with
10:51 um how our population says we're going
10:53 to grow in the next six years and make
10:54 sure that we have the facilities in that
10:58 um Capital facility plan to um provide
11:01 for the population that's coming and in
11:03 all the level of service calculations
11:05 the only thing that's starting to um to
11:08 be in this in the future is that we're
11:10 going to need more Public Safety space
11:12 probably by
11:14 2019 um because the police are starting
11:16 to outgrow their facility um and as you
11:19 know things happen you know you can move
11:21 we have so many offices you can we can
11:23 you know move and adjust um but this
11:26 element is something that helps the
11:28 council decide where do we need to start
11:30 investing what changes do we need to
11:32 make in the near future so that we're
11:34 able to provide for growth and housing
11:36 and jobs that are in our
11:41 Targets this is where you all come in I
11:44 think part of what the city did this
11:46 year um we have a we own a lot of
11:49 property and the uh Council asked us to
11:51 do a inventory of all that we own to see
11:54 if we had any surplus property that we
11:56 either didn't need anymore that we
11:57 wanted to get rid of or you know what
12:00 all was out there do they have
12:01 facilities on them do they have Parkland
12:03 on them um what's out there so we we did
12:07 an inventory and we found that a lot of
12:10 parcels just had the wrong zoning on it
12:12 we had um one of my favorites is there's
12:15 a tiny little square up near Forest Rim
12:17 that has the two big water towers on it
12:19 or one um but it's zoned open space
12:23 obviously it's not open space it has two
12:26 huge you know things on it that you
12:29 would never think of that as you know
12:31 pristine lovely open space because it
12:32 has two big facilities on it so we
12:35 wanted to switch the zone to more
12:37 accurately describe how much Community
12:39 facilities facilities land we have and
12:42 how much open space we actually have um
12:44 that's one example um the city owned
12:47 land is um has three different
12:50 designations all under the umbrella of
12:53 community facilities one is open space
12:55 which is typically what you would
12:57 imagine pristine open space that really
13:00 shouldn't have a lot on it or anything
13:02 on it unless it's like something like a
13:04 utility um easement or something through
13:07 it um Recreation is another sort of
13:11 obvious one it would be a park or
13:12 something um of that nature that ball
13:15 fields kind of thing or um facilities
13:19 which is something that you would think
13:20 of that's either bulky like the Water
13:22 Tower or bulky like the police station
13:25 that might have some traffic associated
13:27 with it or bulky like the city hall or a
13:29 fire station um or a school could be a
13:32 facility any of those that are they are
13:34 more a built kind of a um object that
13:37 may also have transportation issues
13:39 because you know people are coming to
13:41 the city hall or they're coming to the
13:42 courthouse or they're coming to the
13:43 school obviously there's not a lot of
13:45 people coming to the water tower but
13:48 that's still a considered a
13:50 facility most of them had low density
13:53 residential land use designations on
13:55 them or they were just in the wrong
13:57 category of community facilities
14:00 when we realized um the errors that we
14:02 wanted to change by law we have to send
14:05 everyone within 300 feet of that parcel
14:09 notification that we would like to try
14:11 to change the zone and the designation
14:13 so that's why you all heard about this
14:15 because your property was amongst you
14:18 know the 300 feet of one of those
14:21 Parcels okay any questions from you all
14:24 on that one
14:27 okay this is the the this is the map of
14:30 the 31 as you can see some of them are
14:32 so little they're little than the
14:34 numbers that are on top of them some of
14:37 them are really little
14:40 this that's that's the one with the
14:44 water the big water towers on
14:46 it so this was one category of rezones
14:50 and red designations that you all may
14:52 have gotten a letter about the other one
14:55 there are two others one is the Emer
14:57 property and I'll quick switch to where
14:59 the map is on that it's a lot easier to
15:01 see on the map this is along
15:04 sr900 north of the Talis
15:07 entrance it's about
15:09 6.2 Acres I believe going to flip back
15:13 to the um it was back in the 90s when
15:17 the Talis back then it was called East
15:19 Village Development agreement was agreed
15:22 to with the city council and the master
15:24 developer this parcel was added as a
15:28 potential expansion area they didn't
15:30 have ownership of it yet but they did
15:32 the environmental review of it they
15:34 decided what land uses could be there if
15:37 they should ever get the ownership um
15:40 control of the land and they um they we
15:44 agreed that if they should ever be able
15:46 to control the land they would only have
15:47 to do these five things to bring it into
15:50 um bring it into the Urban Village
15:53 because we've already figured out the
15:54 land uses the trips the environmental
15:56 review of it that they just had to to
15:59 take over ownership and then apply for
16:01 this so they've met all of the um the
16:04 criteria they're in the process through
16:06 this process of applying to become an
16:09 expansion area and this is um this is
16:12 the Emer
16:15 property okay the next and last
16:19 redesignation this is what we call cron
16:22 Lane it's
16:24 um right off of cron Lane South of um
16:29 it would have been um you know 100 part
16:32 of the extension of Clark Street should
16:34 Clark Street had had ever been extended
16:38 and it never of course was um the city
16:40 owned this property it um had it's Steep
16:43 and has um you know there wasn't
16:46 anything we were going to do with it we
16:48 sold it last year to the applicant that
16:51 was um proposing a short plat on crosson
16:54 L of four properties and he applied in
16:58 August July August and a letter went out
17:01 to the property owners at that time that
17:03 there was a plat coming in and it was
17:06 under review and um it hasn't been
17:08 approved yet it hasn't been decided
17:10 they've done the environmental review um
17:12 but before they can go any farther
17:15 because the city has sold it we have to
17:17 change the zoning of it because it's no
17:19 longer Community facilities it's
17:21 actually privately owned and um needs to
17:23 have a single family Zone on it so
17:26 that's what this one this um proposal is
17:29 it's you know less than less than half
17:31 an acre and um it would be become it
17:34 would become part of the crosson lane
17:35 short plat if that was
17:39 approved um the hopefully the steps for
17:43 tonight is um you'll get to ask all your
17:46 questions you'll get to make a lot of
17:48 comments and questions um you'll decide
17:51 if you know enough or feel comfortable
17:53 enough making a res recommendation to
17:55 the full Council um if when it goes to
17:58 council
17:59 whenever that is they're going to send
18:01 it through their committees and their
18:02 work sessions and hopefully if all goes
18:05 well we'll be done in by the end of June
18:07 when the state deadline says that we
18:09 need to be
18:10 done are there any questions from you
18:17 all I think we'll wait to see what we
18:19 find from the public comment to see if
18:21 there's any additions or
18:24 okay our next uh thing that we're going
18:27 to do is to actually open the public
18:30 hearing but before I do that does
18:33 anybody else want to sign up to speak
18:36 tonight is there anybody
18:50 else I limited to
18:57 minutes there will be
18:59 there will
19:00 be my question I asked will you be
19:03 taking questions
19:05 or taking short questions as opposed to
19:09 a speech
19:13 'll I I just I think I'm not sure of the
19:16 process I haven't been to one of these
19:17 meetings so before and I do I just put
19:20 my hand up and ask a
19:22 question well what we what you're going
19:24 to do is go to the the microphone and
19:27 ask the question so that our
19:29 millions of listening audience can can
19:31 hear you and be part of the discussion
19:34 so you'll see how it flows and
19:35 absolutely you have the right to um your
19:38 comment is is like you your question is
19:41 like a comment so we will incorporate it
19:44 into it so are we still signing up yes
19:48 still signing up
20:12 yes
20:20 minutes a watch I think
20:33 okay so I'm going to
20:35 open the public comment uh public
20:39 hearing at
20:42 6:50 um I want to reinforce the fact
20:45 that each one of you will have the
20:47 opportunity to speak but you will be
20:49 limited to five minutes so that we
20:52 can get everybody in tonight so who is
20:56 first
20:58 John Brian okay come to the
21:03 microphone in tell us who you are where
21:06 you live I'm uh John Brian I'm chair of
21:08 the NGP committee on montro homeowners
21:12 association and I was invited to hear by
21:16 uh a number of uh homeowners in the
21:18 neighborhood who were a little concerned
21:20 about um a change of use and what that
21:24 might how they might their were their
21:26 lifestyle might be impacted
21:28 by um
21:30 two um Lots or tracks I should say
21:35 there's track
21:38 number track number one which is on alen
21:41 Glenn and track
21:43 number uh I think it's four it's hard to
21:46 read the designation on uh off Isola
21:49 place I'm going to switch the map so
21:51 it's easier to see
21:56 okay and um so I've had just a couple of
21:59 days to have a look at this and um at
22:02 first I thought um the tracks were part
22:05 of the NGP area that uh Borders or
22:08 surrounds or is part of the montro
22:11 development and I don't know if any of
22:14 you are familiar with the montro
22:16 development and the uh NGP area that
22:19 surrounds it but that uh land in my
22:22 understanding is is owned by the montro
22:24 Association but administered by the
22:27 city and and um it I it's still not
22:32 absolutely clear to me the ownership of
22:34 these tracks I think one is track G and
22:36 one is track B track B um it seems to be
22:40 at the bottom of the cerac of uh
22:43 montro of alpen glow and track G runs
22:49 behind between the native growth
22:51 protection area and B behind houses that
22:55 um uh the backyards of hous is on montro
22:59 and Isola place so is my question
23:03 knowing I've only got five minutes um my
23:06 question is is this just a technical
23:09 change that you are doing or is there
23:11 going to be a change of use which might
23:13 involve you turning it into basketball
23:15 courts or Recreation areas no these are
23:18 all the all 31 of the community
23:21 facilities rezones are technical changes
23:23 there are no proposed uh changes of use
23:25 to any of these properties we're just
23:27 trying to correct things for the papers
23:29 and for tax purposes and so that's
23:32 that's why these are being done no
23:33 change of uses are being proposed oh
23:36 well so what were they and what will
23:38 they become uh they're all different I
23:40 mean some were Zone single family duplex
23:42 some were Zone single family Suburban
23:45 just talking those right there
23:48 um those two are single family sub
23:51 single family suburban and they're being
23:54 proposed as Community facilities
23:56 facilities so when I a CL verification
23:59 question so when he said um number one
24:01 and number four is those represent the
24:04 numbers here on our I'm assuming those
24:06 are okay yes they see yes I'm reading
24:09 from the letter and it was hard to tell
24:11 whether it was a two or a four I believe
24:13 if you're talking about the furthest one
24:14 to the West it's number two that would
24:16 be that would be the Mont number one
24:19 right okay so essentially if there's no
24:21 change of use um I I really don't have
24:24 any more questions okay if it's if it's
24:25 not going to be built on that's all no
24:27 it will not
24:29 thank you you're
24:30 welcome who's
24:33 next the
24:40 she thank you uh John Bryan just spoke
24:44 Lyn
24:46 Davis yes you do and is there anyone
24:48 else who'd like to sign this anyone
24:52 else
24:56 okay hi um track the number 24 your
25:01 state your name and your address please
25:02 Lyn Davis 420 Southeast Evans Lane isqua
25:07 um number 24 is right in front of my
25:10 home and so now I understand that it was
25:12 just for zoning and no changes but my
25:15 question is um in the future um is there
25:19 any purpose for it or because it's
25:22 basically just like a gravel strip next
25:24 to the road or would it possibly be
25:26 sidewalk since we're right next to Clark
25:28 work um what could the use be well it's
25:31 09 Acres it's not even a tenth of an
25:34 acre so you know aside from potentially
25:37 some sort of access easement or maybe
25:41 some
25:42 underground lines or something I no
25:45 nothing would be built on top of it that
25:46 I can IM have to worry about it then
25:48 never say never but not my lifetime so
25:51 okay awesome that's all I have okay
25:54 thank you you're welcome
26:00 Jim
26:06 Bruner I'm Jim Brunner 520 Wilderness
26:09 Peak Drive I had a question on the uh
26:12 the Talis Emer uh reone so what is the
26:16 current zoning on that land the current
26:19 zoning
26:25 is low density residential you conserv
26:29 Conservancy residential um cons consy
26:33 residential consy resal and what's the
26:37 new proposed zoning Urban and what's the
26:39 difference between that um they can do
26:43 because of the environmental review they
26:44 did with the development
26:48 agreement is the red light
26:50 on here
26:53 hello hello I found it okay there I am
26:57 sorry um it can be between 6 to 12
27:00 developments on the um per acre it's a
27:03 um sort of a constrained site you know
27:06 it's certainly not a flat Valley kind of
27:08 a site but it's proposed that it can be
27:10 anywhere between six and 12 units per
27:12 acre up there on the six acres that it
27:15 has so basically the proposal is to
27:17 increase the housing density on that
27:19 plot correct correct and again the
27:22 environmental review and the traffic
27:23 counts were already done back when they
27:25 did all of the Talis um development
27:27 agreement traffic counts right they had
27:29 to do the traffic concurrency and the um
27:32 all the mitigation and environmental
27:34 review back when they did the
27:35 development agreement uhhuh so we have
27:37 no no traffic problems in isqua I didn't
27:39 say that I would never say that but
27:43 again it's they've already done their
27:44 review for it for the thought that
27:46 someday they would be able to bring it
27:47 into the Urban Village what year was
27:49 that done it was in the 90s okay so in
27:51 the 90s a traffic review was done MH and
27:54 it's now 2014
27:56 2015 um
27:58 I understand there's some traffic issues
28:00 in isqua rezoning land for higher
28:03 density um what's the impact on that
28:07 well when they bring their project um in
28:10 because again they haven't brought a
28:12 specific project they've just requested
28:14 that the land be brought in um they
28:16 haven't actually proposed a project on
28:18 it yet we would take a look at it then
28:21 um and I would imagine I haven't seen
28:23 anything but we would review it against
28:25 the environmental review that was done
28:27 back with the development agreement to
28:29 see if it's you know similar not similar
28:32 or how that would be I'm concerned about
28:34 raising the density on that property I
28:36 mean I think we've all seen the Great
28:38 Wall of Talis going up and it it doesn't
28:41 really uh enhance our community I don't
28:44 think um so may disagree on that and
28:48 slapping a higher density uh
28:50 neighborhood into that what is now trees
28:54 um I don't think will enhance the uh
28:57 area either
28:59 I'm guessing that others here feel the
29:01 same way right and um sadly the the um
29:05 in your case the um decision was made by
29:07 Council that if they could um do these
29:10 five things if they could take over
29:12 ownership and they're not getting
29:13 additional density they're they're using
29:16 the density that they've already had
29:17 approved in the Talis development
29:19 agreement and they're allowed to put
29:21 some of it there it's not like
29:23 additional from what they've already
29:24 been approved we're rezoning that Land
29:26 from the density it's at to density
29:28 correct and we're basing that on a
29:31 traffic study that's uh 20 years old um
29:36 yep that's the beauty and the detriment
29:38 of of development agreements is that
29:40 20-year lifespan things can change and
29:43 things can stay the same and it's a
29:46 contract between the master developer
29:48 and the city and we think that's the
29:50 right thing to do for the
29:51 city apparently we did in the 90s when
29:55 we approved it it's 2015 now do we think
29:57 it's the right thing to do now right I
30:01 that's not for me to say so that's my
30:03 question to the council it's a good
30:05 question thank
30:13 you Steve
30:17 Anderson he asked my question okay Doug
30:26 how hi I'm Doug how 1085 Greenwood
30:29 Boulevard Southwest squawk Mountain
30:32 adjacent to the little sliver parcel 27
30:36 several of my neighbors uh received the
30:38 letters and we um it got our attention
30:41 because I believe three or four years
30:43 ago there was an effort we were notified
30:46 to establish a trail Network um off the
30:48 same little sliver of property that went
30:50 down behind the
30:51 homes um and I believe it's going to
30:54 connect with the upper squawk Mountain
30:55 Trails so my question is is the rezone
30:59 of 27 which into Community
31:02 facilities which is listed on page one
31:04 as purposes include hiking trails is
31:08 there any effort to initiate a new
31:11 hiking trail because 27 doesn't connect
31:14 to any other public land it would have
31:16 to go through private our basically our
31:18 backyards to get up to the upper Trails
31:20 of the mountain no this this is simply a
31:23 technical change and there were we
31:26 uses whatever it is now is we're plan
31:28 we're planning on leaving it that way so
31:30 no there's been no discussion about
31:31 Trails there okay if there were would we
31:34 receive a letter then and I believe that
31:37 you would those are done by the parks
31:39 department I'm not sure what exactly
31:41 their process is but the parks
31:43 department is the one who determines
31:44 that kind of
31:45 Trail if if a trail were to go through
31:48 private property though we would need to
31:49 be notified oh oh yeah yeah absolutely
31:52 absolutely
31:54 okay thank you
32:14 NE good
32:16 evening uh Venit wahi 2661 Northwest
32:21 pine cone place in
32:22 isqua uh I'm here to speak on behalf of
32:25 some of our neighbors our Homeowner
32:26 Association is not yet fully formed as
32:28 we are still waiting for two houses to
32:29 be built and or complete uh completed
32:33 and then sold and then I think the Homer
32:34 Association will transfer from the
32:35 developer to the homeowners so I'm
32:37 speaking only on behalf of certainly me
32:39 personally and a few of our
32:41 neighbors um I'm speaking about uh
32:44 number three up there on the
32:46 map um I did some research the letter
32:48 indicated that we should speak with
32:50 Kristen at the city uh and then I also
32:52 wound up speaking with a gentleman named
32:53 Carrie also from the city uh City
32:56 Planning so my comments are a
32:59 conglomeration of what I learned through
33:01 that process um currently there is a
33:03 chain link fence surrounding a very deep
33:06 detention Pond where the water um I
33:09 guess flows in or seeps in and then it's
33:12 there to uh be it seeps out so it's to
33:14 not wash down the hillside it is a it's
33:16 a steep development um and it is 25 30
33:20 ft deep it's quite
33:22 deep um it's a bit of a hazard frankly
33:25 for a few reasons number one it's really
33:27 just in the spring and the summer kind
33:29 of a breeding ground for mosquitoes it
33:30 is slightly moving water but there's um
33:33 a layer of green pond scum on there now
33:36 I was just out there a few hours ago um
33:38 and I obviously can't tell from that far
33:39 away if there's mosquitoes buzzing
33:40 around but n nonetheless uh it's not a
33:42 it's not a very pleasant way to have
33:44 left that area
33:48 um there's also a hole in the fence and
33:51 so small I've got photographs if any of
33:54 you care to see them a child or even a a
33:56 a modest size adult could sneak through
33:58 a child obviously would be in terms of
34:00 an attractive Hazard would sleep would
34:02 be able to scoot through there and fall
34:04 uh and be injured quite seriously with
34:06 without any question and so the point of
34:09 that is that certainly the fence can be
34:11 repaired in the short term but in the
34:12 long term there are uh 30 homes of which
34:15 there are 23 children uh under the age
34:17 of five that live in that home live in
34:19 those homes um and it's an attractive
34:22 nuisance as it is now even once it's
34:23 repaired it's invariably going to
34:25 deteriorate over time or be damaged and
34:27 the same problem will be repeated and so
34:29 the current state is not good for public
34:31 from a public policy standpoint or
34:32 certainly from the neighbors
34:34 standpoint um the city has demonstrated
34:36 its goal of having uh parks within
34:39 walking distance of the neighborhoods
34:40 that it allows to be developed uh
34:42 there's no such Park that exists in our
34:45 neighborhood um within walking distance
34:47 you m you pretty much have to get in
34:49 your car and drive to a park uh at this
34:52 time at 23530 Southeast 49th Street
34:56 there is a similar
34:58 structure um and as part of the
35:00 development it was a lid was put on it
35:01 and a a small community park was placed
35:03 on it and so we would ask or I would ask
35:07 um that that there since there's a
35:09 precedent for that sort of treatment
35:10 that this be done for our neighborhood
35:13 well I believe what we're asking for is
35:16 that with this change in zoning uh it's
35:19 going to be I don't know if solidified
35:21 as the right word it's going to be
35:21 rezoned to be
35:24 CFR excuse me cfff whereas CF R would be
35:28 far superior in uh gaining support and
35:32 eventually having a lid placed on the
35:34 top of this pond and a park potentially
35:37 put on top of it as
35:38 well so that's our requ I guess my
35:41 question is would that not lead the city
35:44 to eventually look at that more
35:45 seriously and or uh is that really what
35:48 would drive us to that ultimate
35:55 goal did you want to well well I'm
35:58 thinking well I'm the one I spoke to
36:00 someone earlier about this on the phone
36:02 and I said I am not a uh detention Pond
36:05 specialist so he needed to talk to
36:06 Carrie which apparently he did or you
36:08 did I did I believe it was um and Carrie
36:10 said that this was an acceptable way to
36:13 treat it I can talk to him but yeah he
36:15 he actually was very kind and um and
36:17 contacted the consultant that did the
36:20 actual engineering works for originally
36:22 for this detention Pond and it is
36:24 structurally capable of handling uh a
36:27 lid being put on it not just in
36:29 isolation but there would need to be
36:30 either peers or some sort of Steel
36:32 reinforcement that would go across it um
36:34 but that it is possible for a modest by
36:37 Public Works Pro uh standards cost okay
36:40 because this is a it's a it's a much
36:42 bigger process than rezoning it to
36:44 Recreation so you know especially if
36:47 it's something that is the city is
36:48 expected to undertake as far as the cost
36:50 goes because especially a lid is not
36:53 inexpensive um so that part of it is not
36:56 something that I can answer right now
36:58 sure um so but formally changing it to
37:02 Recreation um I suppose this could be
37:04 the formal
37:05 request right and and the other piece um
37:09 even if it was Zone facilities um
37:11 because it's a storm water Pond even if
37:13 it was covered over with a recreation
37:15 facility it's still a a storm water
37:18 facility as well it's sort of a multi be
37:21 a multi-use and um another angle maybe
37:24 we could go for is that the parks
37:26 department is up updating their big plan
37:28 in this next year and that would be a a
37:31 brilliant comment for your your
37:33 neighborhood to make you know see how
37:35 easy this would be for our neighborhood
37:36 to have a walkable Park is to put it
37:38 right over your storm water facility
37:40 sure and I'll make a note to ask them um
37:42 tomorrow what what How would how would
37:45 it help them for you to ask you know do
37:47 they do they want to talk to you about
37:49 your thoughts for that or do you know
37:51 how what's the process to do the next
37:53 step of of turning that into it because
37:55 I'm sure it's it would have to get on
37:57 the City's budget um you know proposal
38:00 to to allocate the money for something
38:02 like that but right I I certainly cannot
38:04 speak for anyone but myself personally
38:06 um but there's two reasons why I think
38:07 this would be two additional Reasons
38:09 from a financial standpoint why this
38:10 would be beneficial number one um if it
38:13 were so again this is very loose numbers
38:16 uh the estimate that would be that it
38:18 would be approximately $1 to $150,000 to
38:20 put a lid on top of it and I don't know
38:22 whether that means just now we have a
38:24 concrete lid or if there's some sort of
38:25 covering that's reasonably attractive in
38:27 uh while waiting for a park quote
38:29 unquote to be um put on there so I think
38:33 that's the that's the scale we're
38:34 talking about it's not a million and
38:35 it's not $25,000 it's about1 $100,000
38:38 plus is the offthe cuff guess um and I
38:42 was told that there's something called a
38:43 utility local improvement district which
38:46 is effectively a private activity a
38:48 private Bond if you will that the
38:50 neighbors would vote on if there was a
38:51 majority then um if the city were to
38:54 make a contribution uh it's right next
38:57 to the Bentley house as well potentially
38:59 they would they would benefit because
39:00 their view is now for several of their
39:02 residents you know on a pond basically
39:05 an unattractive concrete bunker um and
39:08 so presumptively by doing that and I
39:10 understand there's rules about how much
39:12 um property taxes can increase by but
39:14 this would increase the public coffers
39:15 over time by increasing property values
39:18 for at least 35 well 70 residents 70
39:21 units if you include the Bentley house
39:23 plus the the immediately surrounding
39:24 neighborhood that's there and that's
39:26 just our little neighborhood if you
39:27 extend it a little bit further it's
39:28 probably another hundred homes so
39:31 obviously it's arguable well how much
39:32 would it increase it by and what would
39:33 the property tax increase be etc etc but
39:36 uh my suspicion is that there would be
39:38 there would be there's a strong
39:39 motivation both from a public policy
39:41 standpoint as well as from the
39:42 neighborhood to have a park there as I
39:44 mentioned we have so many small children
39:45 and right now we basically just play
39:47 have them play in the street um uh and
39:49 there's nowhere else for them to go
39:50 unless we want to get on our cars and
39:51 drive and that really destroys the
39:53 neighborhood feel so when it's a nice
39:54 day you'll find 15 kids in their little
39:57 trikes or just running around with dogs
39:59 and that's not an ideal scenario so and
40:03 if you leave your email for us we'll get
40:05 you connected with the parks folks to to
40:07 see how or if we can move forward with
40:09 that because you know it's not a bad
40:11 idea to to use it more than one way
40:14 thank you thank you and is just leaving
40:15 it on that signin sheet adequate yes uh
40:18 sure yes okay thank you that's a long
40:21 range plan but fixing the fence is not
40:24 right I have that down too the fence is
40:26 so we are going to uh continue on follow
40:29 if you'd like I can show you the picture
40:30 now or afterwards offline whatever is if
40:32 it's valuable let's do it afterwards
40:35 sure Matt
40:47 mattingley hi I'm Matt mattingley I live
40:49 at 700 West Sunset way uh just up the
40:53 hill and I'm here to speak on behalf of
40:56 the Emirate
40:57 State uh I uh represent them and uh Mr
41:02 and Mrs em unfortunately died some time
41:04 ago some of us who've been here as long
41:07 as I have since the 70s remember that uh
41:09 traffic was not a problem in those days
41:12 uh but it has gotten terrible and
41:14 there's no question that that's true um
41:17 neither uh is of
41:20 Interest as the as The Heirs and the
41:23 estate is concerned when they were
41:26 originally approached by the original
41:29 developer of
41:31 Talis uh they elected not to sell to
41:35 Talis at that
41:37 time and they elected that because they
41:39 had a very prosp they had their own home
41:42 there they were elderly people had a
41:43 very prosperous uh Nursery there I think
41:46 most of us if you've been here anytime
41:48 at all bought fuches and Bonas from them
41:51 uh nonetheless uh they were promised at
41:55 the time that if they did not oppose
41:57 Talis and the Talis development that
42:00 they would
42:02 be included in this ultimate
42:06 expansion to uh Talis and that would
42:10 then enhance the value of the property
42:12 for their children and grandchildren if
42:15 they had sold it originally then it
42:18 would have gone in at the zoning that is
42:20 now being considered because that was
42:22 already approved and what I guess they
42:25 don't understand and I would like some
42:27 explanation perhaps from you guys when
42:29 this was already agreed to already
42:32 approved vetted forever in a day as they
42:36 always are why in the Dickens isn't it
42:39 done now uh why can't because if we
42:44 postpone it and po we postpone it now
42:45 for three years uh part of that is
42:48 certainly no fault of the city of isqua
42:50 because the economy was in the toilet uh
42:53 but nonetheless we've postponed it and
42:55 postponed it because now we're told got
42:57 to go through zoning and all why it's
42:59 already approved it it's a lengthy
43:02 process and if we can't get construction
43:05 started then we got to wait another year
43:07 and all of that is very very upsetting
43:10 and costly to The Heirs right well um I
43:13 can understand what you're saying um
43:15 this was the first um there were five
43:18 criteria that that that you all agreed
43:20 to and one of them was that the master
43:23 developer had to approach the city and
43:25 say remember remember that agreement we
43:28 had we're ready now that was that was
43:29 done and they're here now that was done
43:31 some time ago right well we didn't hear
43:34 that they had to come and say we're
43:36 ready now and as soon as they said we're
43:38 ready which was in um December we said
43:42 we'll be done by June you'll have an
43:44 answer yes or no by June so I have't I
43:46 have an executed earnest money agreement
43:48 four years ago when they became in
43:50 possession of the property and said that
43:53 they talked to the people in charge and
43:55 were told they would have to go through
43:57 a rezone which is true which that we
43:59 were asked in this but the reone had
44:01 already been approved well it was
44:03 approved with the criteria that they had
44:05 to approach the city to ask us and we
44:07 were just asked in December and they did
44:09 approach the city well the gentleman I
44:12 anyway it anyway The Heirs have asked me
44:16 in they in Kansas and all over the place
44:19 had asked me to please come and see if I
44:21 can find out why this thing has been
44:23 stalled for so long and why they can't
44:26 settle their
44:28 estate well we acted on it as soon as we
44:30 got the the request in December we put
44:32 it on in allence to the gentleman who
44:35 raised the question uh that I I think
44:37 it's important to to know that that
44:40 density is already allowed it will not
44:44 change it will change on that particular
44:46 parcel but it will not change the
44:48 density that is allowed in Dallas it's
44:51 simply a transfer of location of the
44:53 density and therefore any traffic that
44:56 you're conc concerned about is going to
44:58 be there whether it's going to be there
45:00 from a different location or the same
45:02 location no problem also the uh heirs
45:06 and and
45:08 uh family
45:10 had a roadway or an entranceway a
45:13 driveway put in to access the property
45:17 rather than that real steep climb up the
45:19 hill that we had to make when we were
45:20 buying fuchsia uh and it was put in by
45:23 the uh by the county and uh it's in it's
45:27 ready to go so it will be a legitimate
45:31 intersection as opposed to a windy
45:34 driveway anyway uh thank you for
45:36 listening I'm still confused thank
45:45 you I can't read this
45:48 Kim Fox
45:58 and Barbara are you both
46:04 together I'm Kimmy Cox and I live at 695
46:08 17th Avenue Northwest this is the first
46:10 time i' ever done something like this so
46:12 this really new for me um my mom she's
46:15 owned property and lived in isqua since
46:17 1973 and she bought this house uh in 78
46:20 we've been there for a really long time
46:22 and we've been very blessed we live on
46:24 an acre and um what we had land all
46:27 around us property around us and Talis
46:29 came in and took out the 500 acres and
46:33 we you know swallowed and took that in
46:36 um because we can't progressly
46:38 understand that but a lot of we've seen
46:40 a lot of changes one traffic light to
46:42 now many traffic lights and very little
46:45 traffic with cow pastures to a huge
46:49 um conglom that's getting as big as B
46:52 you know and it's really sad to see this
46:54 little to it's really hard to see this
46:56 little town of isqua gets so big you
46:59 know that's what makes it so special but
47:02 um we were just concerned because we're
47:04 right next to Talis so the property that
47:06 they're going to build is going to be
47:07 right in front of our house where
47:08 they're going to build um we've
47:12 seen so many you know uh changes and I
47:18 agree with the gentleman that was
47:19 talking about the traffic because I I
47:21 have asthma and I can now smell the ex
47:26 lost from Talis from all the cars that
47:29 go through sr900 and it's just really
47:33 been hard on my health my mom's health
47:36 and it's just really sad to see um it
47:39 deteriorate like that and I'm sure other
47:41 people around there are feeling the same
47:42 thing and maybe not saying anything but
47:44 um the question she had um was she
47:48 wanted to know how many feet can they
47:51 actually come up to the front of our
47:53 property is it like 30 ft or what is the
47:56 actual
47:58 do you guys know that I don't know the
47:59 setbacks I don't know the development
48:00 agreement we were hoping that maybe I
48:02 can get you in touch with somebody you
48:04 know during business hours that could
48:06 explain the you know the actual
48:07 development agreement setbacks and
48:09 height and that kind of thing but um
48:11 because I was hoping if they do build
48:13 there that they could put like some kind
48:14 of like green space in between because
48:18 we have a lot of wildlife of course
48:19 everybody does here in esqua and we have
48:21 like a nursery we've been watching like
48:24 we have like eight or nine deer in our
48:25 yard all the time continuously and we
48:27 have a nursery right there where all the
48:30 The Mamas and have their babies right
48:32 there all the time every year and um
48:35 they play right in their front yard and
48:36 everything and I just can see that's all
48:38 going to be gone and another thing that
48:40 concerns me is right in t us there's
48:42 like a little stream that's been there
48:43 for a long time and I'm concerned about
48:45 whether that's going to be gone now that
48:48 little stream and that connects to the
48:51 isqua
48:53 um Creek and I know we have our Salmon
48:57 Run and everything so I don't know how
48:58 that's going to affect the environment
48:59 but I'm sure they've done Environmental
49:01 Studies you were saying that that
49:02 they're kind of going through the
49:03 process to do everything the right steps
49:05 and I just hope they consider all those
49:07 things right if you leave me your email
49:09 or if it's on the sheet I can get you in
49:11 touch with a current planner that can
49:12 help you through all the setbacks and
49:14 the buffers and the stream okay pieces
49:16 that would be wonderful okay and then
49:18 the other question she have of
49:28 she just want to know about zoning
49:30 92000 has that changed or is that the
49:32 same the zoning that's that I hope I'm
49:36 saying that correctly on
49:39 sr900 you said you had a question about
49:41 whether this is it single family
49:51 dwelling oh we already talked about that
50:01 and to restate that for the record your
50:03 question was whether the 30 foot
50:04 easement has changed that was on that
50:10 property right I would imagine and we
50:13 can check on this but I would imagine
50:14 that when it was annexed that the
50:17 anything that had to do with the county
50:19 would have been would have become the
50:21 city jurisdiction because it's no longer
50:23 in the county but again an easement is
50:25 something that we could check when you
50:27 came in to actually see your property
50:29 and the setbacks and buffers and the
50:30 stream we could actually figure that out
50:32 when you come in and you know we kind of
50:34 go into the Weeds on it and recently
50:37 just last year we put in um a long
50:40 driveway like about 600 foot driveway up
50:43 to our property and I'm just wondering
50:45 if they're going to be using that now to
50:47 carry their big construction trucks up
50:49 that driveway and stuff we put a lot of
50:51 money into it I was just kind of
50:52 concerned about that getting all tore
50:53 apart on your private property it's um
50:57 between
50:59 sr900 next to the other people's
51:01 property up it's an easement road that
51:03 we went ahead and paid the whole thing
51:05 and paid for it even though it's on
51:06 other people's property so these are
51:08 specific questions that we really we
51:10 need to ask okay but before you leave
51:12 tonight I know you're you wrote your um
51:16 email down here but would you also give
51:18 Trish your phone number so that not now
51:20 oh okay um that so she can make sure
51:23 that she's contacted and you get the
51:25 answers that you want because I know the
51:27 city wants to make sure that everything
51:29 is done right thank you I appreciate
51:32 that I appreciate you guys listening I
51:33 guess that's all my questions thank
51:38 you
51:43 Brit good evening I'm Beth Brett I live
51:46 at 320 1 Avenue Northeast isqua which is
51:50 right in the heart of Oldtown
51:52 isqua um uh I'm here to
51:57 uh specifically about the part the map
52:00 number 13 and 14 which is right in the
52:04 neighborhood where I live um I I will
52:08 say that you know after receiving the
52:10 letter thank you very much I did go and
52:12 I did started to dig through the
52:14 comprehensive plan documents and wow um
52:18 so I you know thank you guys for all the
52:21 hard work that's gone into that so I
52:22 just really really want to reflect that
52:24 it's clear that a lot of hard work and
52:25 thinking has has has gone into that um
52:29 on map number 13 and 14 my question is
52:33 really just understanding why the zoning
52:37 change is is what it is um and and and
52:42 just trying to understand like how it's
52:44 currently being used in a way that
52:46 reflects the new zoning
52:49 change so right the reason for the
52:53 zoning change right now they are there
52:56 zones single family duplex which shows
52:58 that they are privately owned and could
53:00 be developed as single family duplexes
53:02 but that is not the case they are owned
53:05 by the city and as far as I can tell
53:08 they're used by access it was a little
53:09 hard just for Access or something it's
53:11 kind of hard to tell it looks like one
53:12 of these might have been a RightWay
53:13 extension at some point um number 14
53:16 number 13 would be too small um but it
53:19 looks like that might have been what
53:20 that was for but it's not being used as
53:22 that so this is just a technical change
53:25 just to show that it is publicly owned
53:28 and used for public purpose but when I
53:30 read the definition of cff it says that
53:34 it's use includes uses that generate
53:36 high levels of traffic these are all
53:39 single family residences I mean because
53:41 I live there right these are all single
53:44 family residences on a dead end Street
53:46 and that's true for both 13 and 14
53:49 they're right against the creek MH right
53:52 I mean we're probably 100t from a creek
53:55 and you you know there are children
53:57 riding bicycles I mean I'm just trying
53:59 to understand cff right the the high use
54:03 the high impact zoning it's also because
54:05 it's a facility like a utility line or a
54:08 um it might there might be something
54:10 underneath it that's a facility that I
54:13 mean certainly a water tower or a police
54:15 station could not be built on either of
54:17 those um but that is one of the
54:19 categories though the high traffic for
54:22 for bigger sites that could have
54:23 something like that this is looks like
54:25 it's a either there's utilities under it
54:27 or as Kristen said it was a right of way
54:30 which is considered a facility kind of a
54:33 um versus open space where you know
54:35 nature and that kind of thing or a ball
54:38 field you know it's certainly neither of
54:40 those okay so there you know in the
54:42 development plans I couldn't find
54:44 anything the comprehensive plan you know
54:47 that would reflect building some
54:49 structure there and I can't imagine how
54:51 you could on 03 and 08 of an acre there
54:56 are no plans to change any of the uses
54:58 on any of these properties it's just
55:00 technical changes okay for paperwork
55:03 okay all right thank you thanks for
55:05 coming in
55:06 yepy
55:11 Grant good evening uh my name is Betsy
55:14 Grant I live at 340 1 Avenue Northeast
55:17 right next to Beth um and I my question
55:21 is about 13 and 14 as well 13 is in the
55:24 front yard of my property and 14 is on
55:26 the backyard of my property um and I've
55:29 heard and listened to everything you've
55:30 said and I understand that there's no
55:31 current plan to use those properties for
55:34 anything but my my primary concern is is
55:37 if um you change your mind in the future
55:40 and you decide to make a plan to use
55:43 that um 14 you can't really do anything
55:45 with because quite honestly it's a dead
55:47 it's it it ends at some another piece of
55:49 private property and it doesn't connect
55:50 to the creek or anything like that um so
55:54 I can't imagine anybody ever wanting to
55:56 do anything like that except for maybe
55:57 extended utility which wouldn't
55:59 interrupt my life but 13 connects
56:02 between the end of our street and
56:04 Dogwood Street um and so potentially um
56:09 somebody could change their mind and
56:10 want to use it for a sidewalk or
56:12 something like that because the land is
56:14 big enough for that um which would cause
56:17 traffic in our neighborhood to increase
56:19 so my question is um or one of my
56:21 questions is does the CF facility's
56:24 designation allow for that use um if you
56:28 decide to change your mind and use it
56:31 and I understand that there's no current
56:33 plan to change it but I'm more concerned
56:35 about 5 or 10 years from now if it has
56:37 this designation you say oh it's a
56:39 facilities we could just slap a sidewalk
56:41 in there anytime we want because it
56:43 already has that designation is that is
56:45 that allowed for in that designation it
56:47 is yes so if you want to you could come
56:50 in and put a sidewalk in there and
56:53 connect between the end of our road and
56:55 Dogwood Street
56:58 yes okay so is there another designation
57:01 that you could give that property that
57:02 would not allow
57:04 that and whether one of the open space
57:07 or Recreation or some other
57:09 designation besides the facilities that
57:11 would allow that without further comment
57:13 there is but we still do as Trish
57:16 mentioned earlier there is the
57:18 possibility that there is a utility
57:19 underneath there okay that we would need
57:21 access to and if that is the case it
57:23 would have to be facilities okay so we
57:25 would need to and check that first okay
57:28 but yes that is a possibility so before
57:31 this is agreed to can somebody look into
57:34 that and see if that's indeed the case
57:37 because I would like I'm very concerned
57:39 about that and your email's on there it
57:41 is so I can email you back it is okay um
57:44 the other thing that is of a concern is
57:46 having additional traffic if the use is
57:48 changed in the future um is there's
57:54 uh illegal activities that are sometimes
57:57 drawn to the do the Dogwood Street
57:59 bridge and we'd be concerned of if that
58:02 use is changed in the future of
58:04 attracting having more ease of access to
58:06 that area for illegal activities
58:09 underneath the bridge so and there's a
58:11 the Press I think it's called the
58:13 Preston Trail is two streets over so in
58:15 terms of just general public use um
58:18 there shouldn't ever be a need for that
58:20 change of use so we just like to make
58:22 sure that it's not a possibility to have
58:25 that but also give the city the correct
58:27 you know a more accurate zoning so yes
58:30 if you wouldn't mind finding out if
58:31 there is a utility under there or a
58:33 different designation other than the
58:35 facilities that it's current plan I
58:38 would appreciate that before this is
58:39 approved and put into the you know made
58:43 law okay I will check into that back to
58:45 you you're welcome thank
58:48 you Jim
58:54 Daniel how I'm uh Jim Daniel I'm at 550
58:57 Wilderness Peak Drive um want to thank
59:00 you all for sending out the letter and
59:01 the hard work getting this to us so we
59:03 can know about this um my question is
59:06 for the commission and it's more of a
59:07 broader I mean everybody has raised
59:09 really good points about the development
59:12 and and like you said to start off you
59:14 know there's potential of light ril
59:15 coming and my and my question
59:18 is knowing that there's going to be
59:21 rapid change rapid development traffic
59:24 parking issues
59:26 what is the commission's role and going
59:30 from a 20-year-old plan to addressing
59:33 these new things that were not even on
59:35 the radar back in the
59:40 90s what's the process right that's
59:43 that's what I'm asking well and I I can
59:46 answer some of this I believe well I was
59:48 I was uh I was talking to him simply
59:51 because he's on the development
59:52 commission there we
59:54 go if this is An approved plan which
59:57 apparently it is I mean that was
59:59 approved then now 20 years later
1:00:01 somebody comes in and wants to change
1:00:02 something it has to go through the
1:00:04 process so uh I'm not really
1:00:08 sure what your question is in regards to
1:00:12 if maybe times have changed but that
1:00:15 doesn't necessarily mean it's like a
1:00:17 contract yeah you signed a contract 20
1:00:19 years ago it's still valid regardless of
1:00:22 the times have changed now you have
1:00:24 different you know there environmental
1:00:26 assessment or review the development
1:00:28 commission will look at any coming plans
1:00:30 coming in for new development or
1:00:32 something we'll look at it if it's on a
1:00:34 site but I'm not sure we yeah maybe I
1:00:37 need to back that up so the the master
1:00:38 plan is there's the Talis master plan
1:00:41 right it was it wasn't really specific
1:00:42 in the letter about that I'm you just
1:00:44 referred to the master developer is that
1:00:46 specifically for the Talis property
1:00:48 right that's the the property owner
1:00:50 that's responsible for the development
1:00:51 of all of Talis okay yeah and I was I
1:00:54 was thinking more about like the the
1:00:55 surrounding area of 900 right because
1:00:57 it's not just Talis it's Talis it's
1:01:00 where the nursery is it's tibits it's
1:01:02 all all of this that's going to be
1:01:04 affected piece by piece or or more so as
1:01:07 it goes and were you all any of you all
1:01:09 here last summer when we had the um what
1:01:12 was the big controversy it was the Talis
1:01:13 trees thing yes anybody hear about that
1:01:16 I can only imagine what it's going to be
1:01:18 like if these properties pop up that
1:01:20 block the views there um and that that
1:01:24 that's kind of feeds me my question is
1:01:25 like how that what's the
1:01:28 process understanding this is a 20 the
1:01:31 the contract is the
1:01:32 contract things are not the same people
1:01:34 are going to have opinions people are
1:01:36 going to
1:01:37 have I'm not sure this answers your
1:01:39 question last night we had a two-hour
1:01:41 development commission meeting on a
1:01:43 property up um on the
1:01:47 isqua All City Road and Highlands Drive
1:01:51 there's a little wedge of property up
1:01:53 there and there's an there's a a company
1:01:57 that wants to install or build a memory
1:02:02 house 60 beds for uh Alzheimer's
1:02:07 patients basically a clinic yeah so they
1:02:10 want to put it on this chunk of property
1:02:12 it's two it's two two different pieces
1:02:16 of property there's Wetlands there the
1:02:18 whole process comes has gone through a
1:02:20 number of meetings with the planning
1:02:22 department last night was a community
1:02:23 conference with the developer and the
1:02:25 development commission and we looked at
1:02:27 the design there are design criteria we
1:02:30 looked at setbacks for the uh Wetlands
1:02:34 we looked whether or not the parking was
1:02:36 sufficient for the number of beds all
1:02:38 this goes through the same process and
1:02:41 you know how many trees were there and
1:02:43 there's a tree rule in regards how many
1:02:45 trees you can cut down and then or have
1:02:47 to replace and how many you have to
1:02:49 retain all those a factors are looked at
1:02:52 by the development commission before
1:02:53 these things are approved I don't know
1:02:56 if that answers your question no that
1:02:57 actually no that that's a great answer
1:02:58 because it leads me to like did that
1:03:00 process happen 20 years ago or is that
1:03:03 what we're going through right now for
1:03:05 for this parcel and I'm I'm sorry is it
1:03:07 one one or is it for the
1:03:11 EM there's an urban there there's an
1:03:13 Urban Village commiss Urban Village
1:03:16 right Urban Village commission that
1:03:17 looked at all these issues when when
1:03:19 Talis and the highlands were developed
1:03:21 they view all those things with the city
1:03:24 at the time it was developed okay yeah
1:03:25 that that's that's why I thought it was
1:03:26 a great answer because it leads to that
1:03:28 so you're saying 20 years ago that was
1:03:31 I'm sure I don't know if they look at
1:03:32 the same criteria but I know they looked
1:03:34 at all those things when they
1:03:35 established those two uh Urban Village
1:03:38 Concepts right right and as you
1:03:40 mentioned about the trees last summer of
1:03:42 course no one could have imagined yeah I
1:03:44 had no dog in that fight I mean right
1:03:46 how things were developed and that's why
1:03:48 the Urban Village commission reviews the
1:03:50 um actual projects as they come in to
1:03:52 make sure are they consistent or not
1:03:54 with the the deal that we made you know
1:03:57 back then does it fit with the
1:03:58 environment does it fit with the traffic
1:04:00 does it fit and sometimes they fit and
1:04:02 sometimes they need to get tweaked so
1:04:03 that it better fits and um so so it's
1:04:06 sort of a two process um a two-ended
1:04:09 process is you set the policy Direction
1:04:12 and what you want to see happen there
1:04:13 and then as the Pieces come in you make
1:04:15 sure they fit into the puzzle that you
1:04:17 you thought you were building okay so I
1:04:19 think we're getting closer to answering
1:04:20 my question that's outstanding
1:04:21 information when is the part you said as
1:04:24 the Pieces come in MH when has that
1:04:26 happen like is that the design proposal
1:04:28 when the developer comes and says I want
1:04:30 to build here right that would have been
1:04:32 when like parcel 7 for Talis would have
1:04:34 come in before the um um econ or um UV
1:04:38 the Urban Village Development commission
1:04:40 and said you know we want the wall and
1:04:43 we want it to be this big and the
1:04:45 community and the UVC said well the wall
1:04:47 can't be this big it can be this big and
1:04:49 so it sort of got fit back into the
1:04:52 puzzle um so that people would um feel
1:04:55 better about it feel that it met the
1:04:57 process or the the original Vision a
1:04:59 little bit better okay but yeah it's
1:05:01 sort of a a two-step you know you you
1:05:03 get the it's sort of like that I want to
1:05:05 go on a vacation and it's wonderful and
1:05:08 then you have to do all the details well
1:05:10 you know can I go to Europe well maybe I
1:05:12 can't but you know but can I go to
1:05:13 Canada that's still International can I
1:05:15 you know and you sort of winnow it down
1:05:17 and then you know you just get into the
1:05:19 details once you get closer to actually
1:05:21 doing the puzzle okay and I'm not sure
1:05:23 if when Emer comes in if it'll go to the
1:05:25 Urban Village commission or not I'm I'm
1:05:28 not that familiar with the development
1:05:30 agreement and is there an example of an
1:05:32 Urban Village that exists inqua that you
1:05:34 can point us to the highlands is an
1:05:35 Urban Village Talis is one Lakeside is
1:05:39 one um that yeah it's confusing because
1:05:41 Highlands has an extensive amount of
1:05:43 retail in it that Talis do not Talis
1:05:45 hasn't gotten there yet but it's it
1:05:47 totally falls into the same they're
1:05:49 similar Talis does have some commercial
1:05:52 up there and there and the original Plan
1:05:54 called for for office off and and so it
1:05:59 is a more commercial area up there so
1:06:02 yeah it is
1:06:04 uh land unit development right and and
1:06:07 Highlands waited a long time before
1:06:09 their retail the market was finally
1:06:11 there for the retail and Talis is
1:06:12 waiting for the market for their office
1:06:15 okay peace all right thank you all very
1:06:16 much good questions though thanks
1:06:19 yeah did I get everybody wanted to
1:06:23 speak that was oh okay I'm sorry I
1:06:27 skipped every I thought he was speaking
1:06:28 on your okay I
1:06:32 apologize um and I'll be quick Jesse
1:06:35 timberman's 18106 Northwest montro Drive
1:06:38 I live just I guess in front of number
1:06:41 two um and I think a lot of these
1:06:43 questions been asked already but just a
1:06:44 different flavor I guess I would request
1:06:45 that and first of all I agree that it
1:06:47 was rezoned inappropriately to begin
1:06:50 with so it's a good rezoning um but
1:06:52 request that it be looked at as a CFO or
1:06:57 CFR instead of the
1:06:59 cfff okay the same as I said earlier I
1:07:03 will go back and check if it's cff it's
1:07:05 usually because there is a utility there
1:07:08 so I will go back and check and I have
1:07:09 your email so I can email you and let
1:07:11 you know perfect okay thank you you're
1:07:14 welcome I just want to uh reiterate I
1:07:18 think there's one other gentleman wants
1:07:20 to speak oh I'm on the next
1:07:22 page I've never had this before uh
1:07:26 Darren please come to the
1:07:29 microphone uh thank you Darren Pew I
1:07:33 represent Talis Management Services uh
1:07:35 we are the master development uh
1:07:37 developer for uh for the Talis
1:07:40 development currently uh here to speak
1:07:43 on behalf of the uh our request to
1:07:45 include the Emer property as part of the
1:07:47 Talis development agreement um as you've
1:07:51 seen that the Emer property is
1:07:52 approximately 6.2 Acres um the Talis
1:07:56 development originally started at
1:07:58 something in excess of
1:08:00 650 Acres uh currently there's a 180
1:08:04 Acres that are under the development
1:08:07 agreement itself uh which includes all
1:08:09 of the parcels that are either currently
1:08:11 under development have been developed
1:08:14 and or are to be developed which
1:08:17 includes the office uh and Commercial
1:08:19 component that you
1:08:21 discussed uh the emeric parcel was
1:08:24 contemplated under the original
1:08:26 development part uh agreement uh then
1:08:29 known as the as the East Village
1:08:31 Development agreement currently the
1:08:32 Talis de development agreement uh as an
1:08:36 expansion parcel so it was identified
1:08:39 reviewed and and contemplated to
1:08:42 ultimately be within the Talis
1:08:45 development um as uh was stated earlier
1:08:50 at that time the owners because they
1:08:52 were still using the property chose not
1:08:56 participate uh in the development at
1:08:59 that point in time but chose to be a
1:09:02 potential participant in the future when
1:09:04 it made more sense for their particular
1:09:07 situation
1:09:10 um currently Talis is entitled to
1:09:15 1760 residential development
1:09:18 units the actual buildout to date
1:09:21 including what's going on in parcel 7
1:09:23 and 8 which are the two
1:09:26 uh actually Parcels 78 and N which are
1:09:28 the three remaining development Parcels
1:09:31 that are under construction have gone
1:09:33 through preliminary plat in the in the
1:09:35 last uh six months and are under
1:09:40 construction including those Parcels
1:09:43 there's only
1:09:45 1,400 out of the six uh out of the
1:09:48 1760 residential Parcels that were um
1:09:52 identified under that agreement that
1:09:54 will actually Beil built out so so under
1:09:57 the current proposal we still have 300
1:09:59 plus units that are in excess of what
1:10:02 was approved under the original
1:10:04 development proposal so this kind of
1:10:07 speaks to some of the traffic issues
1:10:09 some of the things that were
1:10:10 contemplated at the time the Talis
1:10:12 development improved all of the sr900
1:10:15 improvements from uh Newport way all the
1:10:18 way past the development and into Talis
1:10:22 it also extended water sewer utilities
1:10:25 and and and everything up
1:10:27 sr900 as part of the 1700 units those
1:10:31 have not been built
1:10:32 out uh relative to the Emer property uh
1:10:36 they've not been built out in total so
1:10:38 again we still have 300 units that that
1:10:40 were contemplated for traffic sewer
1:10:43 water all of these other utilities they
1:10:45 have not been utilized at this point so
1:10:46 we're we're underdeveloped at this point
1:10:48 in time uh again specific to the Emer
1:10:52 property uh this is 6.2 acres in total
1:10:56 um the request is simply at this point
1:11:00 as as Trish is pointed out is a process
1:11:02 to just first bring it into Talis and
1:11:05 have it be under the development
1:11:07 agreement so that requires a request a
1:11:10 comprehensive plan change so now it's
1:11:13 under the
1:11:14 regulations um that that are consistent
1:11:18 with the development agreement uh for
1:11:22 Talis as far as the development itself
1:11:26 the designation that uh for the parcel
1:11:29 as an expansion parcel was low density
1:11:31 residential I think Trish did say 6 to
1:11:34 12 per acre um that's a maximum and
1:11:39 that's a range that is put on there the
1:11:41 reality for this particular parcel is
1:11:44 because of the topography the most of
1:11:47 the back half of the property is um a
1:11:50 steep slope that's undevelopable there
1:11:53 is a uh uh a small uh stream drainage
1:11:58 ditch that comes through into the pond
1:12:01 uh that limits development we're
1:12:04 probably looking at something around
1:12:07 15 single family residential units
1:12:10 something in the 25 maybe 30 town home
1:12:12 units maximum so as a percentage basis
1:12:16 this is you know one and a half to 2 and
1:12:19 a half% of the entire uh development uh
1:12:23 entitlement that was proved provided
1:12:25 under the Talis agreement so it's it's
1:12:27 really a minor uh amount of of
1:12:30 residential units and certainly was
1:12:32 contemplated as part of the original
1:12:34 development agreement and Falls within
1:12:36 that 1700 units that were entitled um so
1:12:40 I don't think that's a huge impact the
1:12:43 specifics of this particular piece
1:12:45 relative to Talis are number one it sits
1:12:48 well below Talis it doesn't have access
1:12:51 from the the current Talis what I can
1:12:55 considered to be the the main body of
1:12:56 Talis it accesses on its own uh private
1:13:00 driveway off of
1:13:02 sr900 uh it does not access through
1:13:04 anybody else's property so we basically
1:13:06 have a single drive into this small
1:13:09 parcel to to uh access this kind of
1:13:13 small kind of out outcropping of
1:13:16 residential units um it's adjacent to
1:13:20 what is currently the um drainage
1:13:23 facilities that uh for for the main body
1:13:25 of Talis uh what we call uh the sand
1:13:29 filter and um Pond uh 5c down at the
1:13:33 bottom there's also a shop facility so
1:13:36 relative to adjacent uses there there is
1:13:39 potentially a residential use on the
1:13:43 north side of the
1:13:44 property to the um West and to the South
1:13:50 are both Talis Parcels that are
1:13:52 undeveloped and will always be
1:13:53 undeveloped so the impact of this
1:13:55 particular property is really very
1:13:57 minimal relative to both traffic
1:14:01 adjoining properties and and all the
1:14:04 other concerns that that we've raised
1:14:06 and it's really a minor expansion that
1:14:08 was approved and contemplated under the
1:14:10 original development agreement so that's
1:14:13 uh if you have any questions I'm happy
1:14:15 to answer that I appreciate your time I
1:14:18 think you've made a good presentation
1:14:20 thank
1:14:21 you um for all of those people who want
1:14:25 to be contacted or want more
1:14:28 information um if you are not contacted
1:14:31 I would suggest you contact the city
1:14:33 because some of the uh emails to me are
1:14:36 unreadable and if it's an a instead of
1:14:38 an I sometimes you're not going to get
1:14:41 your uh the reply that you're expecting
1:14:44 so um I encourage you to um if you don't
1:14:48 hear from the city in a short amount of
1:14:50 time to please call the city call Trish
1:14:52 and she'll get you in into the uh
1:14:55 contact with the right person so um I
1:14:58 would encourage you to do that so with
1:15:01 that and I see nobody else that wants to
1:15:03 do any um to come to the mic I'm going
1:15:06 to close the the
1:15:10 meeting public hearing at at
1:15:14 7:45 and open it up for discussion for
1:15:17 the committee does anybody have anything
1:15:21 concerning anything in the comp plan
1:15:26 I know that there there's some red in it
1:15:28 some things have been changed um you had
1:15:31 eight suggestions from the community
1:15:34 that you got another copy of today um
1:15:37 most of those ideas were indeed
1:15:39 incorporated into the plan so that um I
1:15:42 want everybody to know that the city is
1:15:44 listening to comments from the community
1:15:46 they are
1:15:47 trying um is there anything else that
1:15:50 you want to add delete um do we have to
1:15:54 vote for approval of this right and I
1:15:56 wanted to add um I'm glad you mentioned
1:15:58 that I received an email late today from
1:16:01 Bill fringer who lives off of cross and
1:16:03 Lane and he was also concerned about
1:16:05 cross and Lane and the development there
1:16:08 um he was more concerned about the
1:16:09 actual project the actual short plat
1:16:12 versus the rezone um but I told them
1:16:14 that I would mention that at the um at
1:16:16 the meeting even though it you're not
1:16:18 really looking at the plat you're
1:16:20 looking at the reone but I told them I
1:16:21 would mention that tonight so thank you
1:16:23 for reminding me that
1:16:27 yeah to
1:16:29 staff a number of the citizens have
1:16:31 asked about changing it to something
1:16:33 else and you'd say you would look at it
1:16:36 so does that any way a change what we
1:16:38 are proposing or we have to make that as
1:16:40 a condition to if we would approve the
1:16:43 comp plan or are we just going to take
1:16:45 as um um well since this what you see
1:16:49 here is the administration's
1:16:51 recommendation based on the research
1:16:53 that we did if you feel
1:16:55 compelled that you would want to change
1:16:57 any of those that were requested based
1:16:59 it based on I don't want to change
1:17:01 anything because I don't know the answer
1:17:02 you don't know the answers either so
1:17:04 you're so I just don't know if what
1:17:07 affect us recommending this if those
1:17:09 things are potentially to be changed
1:17:11 would have you could have that as a
1:17:14 caveat that that they wouldn't either
1:17:16 you're in favor if if the couple that
1:17:19 would have been facilities would change
1:17:21 to something else if you would be in
1:17:23 favor of something like that you might
1:17:25 leave that open or you might say you
1:17:27 know that it's six of one half dozen of
1:17:30 the other and you're fine the way it
1:17:33 is I'm fine the way it is I don't live
1:17:35 there but there are people that are
1:17:38 concerned about changing it and I just
1:17:39 don't want us to give a blanket approval
1:17:42 if we find out after the fact that you
1:17:45 could have changed it and it make make a
1:17:47 difference I right and it would still go
1:17:49 through Council and the council
1:17:50 committees as well and I um as we said
1:17:53 we're going to contact them if they
1:17:54 could could be Chang and then we can
1:17:56 talk about that at the council level as
1:17:58 well that would answer that Carl I think
1:17:59 you just answered my question Trish
1:18:01 there's still an opportunity for public
1:18:03 input and the possibility for them to
1:18:06 have the council consider amendments
1:18:07 even though we adopt this tonight and
1:18:10 send it up for approve it and send it up
1:18:12 right okay ours is just a
1:18:15 recommendation Council has the authority
1:18:17 to say yes or no right so with that I
1:18:23 just have one comment um to the
1:18:25 comprehensive plan and this is to
1:18:27 um H policy A1 on page 87 of 309 of our
1:18:38 packets
1:18:40 goodness and I I believe I voiced this
1:18:43 earlier on oh wait for everyone to get
1:18:46 there housing okay okay 87 okay 87 right
1:18:52 all right okay which number H policy A1
1:18:56 okay um my only suggestion would be um I
1:18:59 believe um King County if not Washington
1:19:03 but I know King County especially uh
1:19:05 includes gender identity as a separate
1:19:08 protected class and just to bring it in
1:19:11 line with County requirements I think
1:19:13 that should be added to H policy
1:19:17 A1 and what was the term gender identity
1:19:28 but other than that I would recommend
1:19:30 approval as well okay I'll add that in
1:19:33 action that one
1:19:34 change a motion to I I have to have
1:19:38 motion to accept all that work so I make
1:19:41 that motion I'll I'll you made the
1:19:43 motion I'll second that motion all those
1:19:45 in favor to add tender identity to
1:19:49 policy
1:19:50 a11 i i
1:19:52 i motion approved
1:19:56 so if we sign off on
1:19:58 this it will be with that
1:20:01 change which you can change in the in
1:20:04 the body of the information right yes
1:20:06 okay so with that I need a I'll make a
1:20:10 motion to approve it as
1:20:13 amended
1:20:15 second did I hear a
1:20:18 second seconds any further discussion
1:20:21 just to verify that um I do want to say
1:20:24 to thank you for the to the staff I mean
1:20:26 this is a really um detailed process and
1:20:30 a detailed plan that um is it a perfect
1:20:34 plan no but is it a a good plan and a
1:20:38 start of a good plan I think we're we're
1:20:39 pretty well there I think it covers just
1:20:42 about everything in the city that they
1:20:43 need to do to look at with the um
1:20:47 comments of the um the people of the
1:20:51 community if there's anything that they
1:20:52 want to change or um you know things can
1:20:55 change for reason and I think you uh
1:21:00 there have been a lot of good reasons
1:21:02 that people have brought to the meeting
1:21:04 this evening so uh thank you very much
1:21:06 so with that I all those in favor of
1:21:09 accepting the comp plan with the one
1:21:12 change please say I I I
1:21:15 opposed we are at approval stage of the
1:21:19 comp plan so with that is there anything
1:21:22 else for the good of the order does
1:21:24 anybody else want to bring up
1:21:26 anything okay with that I will close the
1:21:29 meeting at
1:21:30 7:50 great job the big agenda thank you
1:21:33 all for
1:21:35 coming thanks for
1:21:37 coming and we have all people to call I
1:21:40 actually sat for hour and a half
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.