Joint Special Meeting – Planning Policy Commission, Economic Vitality Commission, & Human Services Commission · Thursday, October 20, 2016 · City Council Digest

1. CALL TO ORDER

Commission Membership

packet pp.3–7

Open packet at p.3 ↗

Staff report:

Planning Policy Commission About Staff Liaison Created in 1983, this commission serves as a Trish Heinonen, Planning Manager policy advisory body to the Mayor and provides Email guidance and direction for Issaquah’s future growth through continued review and improvement to the Regular Members City’s Comprehensive Land Use Plan and related 2018 - Joy Lewis land use documents. 2018 - Jon Stob 2018 - Carl Swedberg Membership 2018 - Justin Walsh The Planning Policy Commission is comprised of 2019 - Joan Probala seven regular members, with four-year terms; and 2020 - Ron Faul several alternates, with two-year terms. All 2020 - Troy Rahmig members are appointed by the Mayor and subject to confirmation by the City Council. Terms expire Alternate Members April 30 of the year listed. For more information, 2018 - Salim Juma see IMC 18.03. 2018 - Larisa Kolcz 2018 - Vacant 2018 - Vacant

2. AGENDA ITEMS

Introductions

Goals, Roles, Timelines

Trish Heinonen, Policy Planning Manager · packet pp.9

Open packet at p.9 ↗

Staff report:

Aug –Sept 2016 Oct 2016 – March 2017 April-June 2017 June-Oct 2017

Housing Inventory

Trish Heinonen, Policy Planning Manager · packet pp.11–36

Topics: Housing

Open packet at p.11 ↗

Staff report:

Housing Analysis Pursuant to RCW 36.70A.070(2), Growth Management Act of Washington.

Thinking about Strategy

Arthur Sullivan, ARCH · packet pp.37–41

Open packet at p.37 ↗

Staff report:

This report supplements information CHART I-1 Household Types provided in the East King County Housing Analysis. Its purposes are to: highlight demographic and housing data for Issaquah that vary from the material presented in the first part of the Housing Analysis, and summarize housing programs utilized by the city.

Business Focus Group Report Out

Jen Davis Hayes, Economic Development Manager · packet pp.43

Open packet at p.43 ↗

Staff report:

City of Issaquah Housing Strategy Business & Community Focus Groups

Commission Discussion

Next Steps

Trish Heinonen, Policy Planning Manager

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.