Planning Policy Commission · Thursday, August 24, 2017 · City Council Digest

1. CALL TO ORDER

Commission Membership

packet pp.3

Previously discussed: Planning Policy Commission · Jun 22, 2017

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 – Lindsey 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 – Victoria Hunt see IMC 18.03. 2018 – AJ McGauley 2018 – Althea Saldanha 2018 – Vacant

2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES

Minutes of July 13, 2017

packet pp.5–12

Previously discussed: Planning Policy Commission · Jun 22, 2017

▶ Watch from 0:22 Open packet at p.5 ↗

Staff report:

tonight, nor is any specific rezoning of any parcels being proposed. She said the annexation of the King County Island is also not part of the

3. AGENDA ITEMS

Public Hearing Proposed Housing Strategy

Trish Heinonen, AICP, Planning Manager · packet pp.13–53

Topics: Housing

Open packet at p.13 ↗

1923 segments .txt ↗

0:14 ↗ so good evening and welcome to the

0:17 ↗ August 24th meeting of the Planning

0:19 ↗ Policy Commission first on our agenda is

0:22 ↗ approval of the minutes from July the

0:26 ↗ 13th is there any discussion changes on

0:30 ↗ the minutes I motion make a motion to

0:35 ↗ approve the minutes all those in favor I

0:37 ↗ have a second second all those in favor

0:39 ↗ aye

0:40 ↗ most though tonight we're doing a public

0:44 ↗ hearing on the proposed housing strategy

0:46 ↗ for the city of Issaquah I know that the

0:50 ↗ city has been meeting with a lot of

0:51 ↗ groups over the last months to determine

0:54 ↗ where the city should go and how to

0:57 ↗ provide housing for all of the various

1:01 ↗ groups that need housing in Issaquah so

1:04 ↗ fish take it away and give us an update

1:06 ↗ of what we're seeing and what the city

1:09 ↗ is looking at for the housing strategy

1:11 ↗ okay tonight we're gonna remind you all

1:16 ↗ of the purpose of the Housing Strategy

1:18 ↗ and the process on how we got here which

1:22 ↗ you all know a lot about that since

1:24 ↗ you've been part of it since the

1:25 ↗ beginning we're going to talk about the

1:27 ↗ mission and problem statements that the

1:29 ↗ Joint Commission's came up with as well

1:31 ↗ as the nine strategies that that we all

1:34 ↗ came up with we're going to unpack one

1:36 ↗ of the strategies so you can see how

1:38 ↗ they're sort of how they fall together

1:40 ↗ or and then talk about the next steps

1:43 ↗ and then open it up to public comment

1:45 ↗ and then whatever you want to discuss or

1:48 ↗ talk about or whatever we can do that if

1:51 ↗ that's okay with you after you've heard

1:53 ↗ from the public and then we can see how

1:55 ↗ far we can get tonight the council would

1:57 ↗ love to have this if they would love for

2:01 ↗ you to recommend it tonight if that's

2:03 ↗ possible this is one of the moratorium

2:05 ↗ items that we're hoping to get done plus

2:08 ↗ some implementation before the end of

2:10 ↗ the year so I would just start out by by

2:13 ↗ letting you know that that's that's what

2:15 ↗ we're hoping for but it's totally up to

2:17 ↗ you

2:19 ↗ the purpose as it says in the strategy

2:21 ↗ is that this is connected to the

2:24 ↗ comprehensive plan in that it's an

2:25 ↗ action plan for the coming five years

2:28 ↗ hopefully we'll have all of it

2:31 ↗ implement well have all of it started in

2:33 ↗ two years so that by the end of the five

2:35 ↗ years we'll be able to actually monitor

2:37 ↗ to see if things have been built if

2:39 ↗ things have changed if we've moved the

2:41 ↗ needle at all so it's a it's a very

2:44 ↗ fine-tuned action plan and perhaps at

2:47 ↗ the end of five years we'll we'll pick

2:49 ↗ nine different strategies because they

2:51 ↗ all worked really well or maybe we throw

2:52 ↗ out five of them and keep four so it's

2:55 ↗ sort of a this is what we want to do in

2:57 ↗ this intense period and then we're going

2:59 ↗ to monitor it to see how how we did and

3:03 ↗ again it's part of the comp plan it

3:05 ↗ talks a lot about the same things that

3:06 ↗ are policy based in the comp plan so

3:09 ↗ they they they're connected that way and

3:13 ↗ I love this picture this is a local

3:14 ↗ picture of habitat of them of us working

3:17 ↗ on habitat in the area and Sammamish the

3:21 ↗ process you've seen this before and

3:23 ↗ you've been involved in it we actually

3:25 ↗ started the housing strategy before the

3:27 ↗ moratorium and that was we had our first

3:30 ↗ deliverable if you will on the existing

3:33 ↗ conditions in the future the same

3:35 ↗ September that the moratorium was

3:37 ↗ established then we started the next

3:40 ↗ session the next step we worked with you

3:43 ↗ all and the economic development

3:45 ↗ commission and the Human Services

3:47 ↗ Commission as what we called the Joint

3:49 ↗ Commission and you all worked very hard

3:51 ↗ five different meetings on some really

3:54 ↗ tough tough pieces of policy and values

3:59 ↗ and you guys were all very great there

4:03 ↗ were some tough issues and all three

4:04 ↗ Commission's are built a little

4:06 ↗ different and focused a little different

4:08 ↗ so it was sort of a nice little sliver

4:10 ↗ of the community all in here trying to

4:12 ↗ figure out which way we should go for

4:14 ↗ the future the third part based on all

4:17 ↗ the the vision and the values and the

4:19 ↗ problem statements you came up with we

4:21 ↗ figured out how do we with all that

4:24 ↗ knowledge how do we launch into the next

4:26 ↗ five years to try to change the way our

4:28 ↗ housing

4:29 ↗ or get different kinds of housing for

4:31 ↗ diversity and ages and special needs so

4:34 ↗ that's what the third part is and now

4:36 ↗ we're we have a draft of a strategy plan

4:40 ↗ and then in January we're hoping to

4:42 ↗ actually launch into the implementation

4:44 ↗ pieces the first piece this was based

4:51 ↗ from the September when the consultant

4:53 ↗ helped us find out a lot of data

4:55 ↗ percentages of all these kinds of things

4:58 ↗ and it was a very analytical look at

5:00 ↗ what our existing housing is like and so

5:03 ↗ these are some of the observations that

5:05 ↗ we've learned that September these are

5:08 ↗ in the strategy and the other part that

5:13 ↗ I found more rewarding not being

5:15 ↗ analytical by nature is the focus groups

5:18 ↗ the Joint Committee and the survey

5:22 ↗ results and what's all the values and

5:26 ↗ the stories and the personal accounts

5:30 ↗ I found these fascinating and these are

5:33 ↗ also in the housing strategy but they're

5:35 ↗ two very different places we went for

5:38 ↗ our outreach the data pieces and right

5:42 ↗ out to the focus groups and the people

5:44 ↗ that really sort of are in the weeds on

5:46 ↗ things and really know how things are

5:47 ↗ happening or not happening so very two

5:50 ↗ very different ways of getting

5:52 ↗ information for us for the Housing

5:55 ↗ Strategy the vision that we came up with

5:59 ↗ we shared this and this isn't the

6:03 ↗ complan vision it's not the housing

6:05 ↗ element vision it's not the central plan

6:07 ↗ housing vision this is what we came up

6:10 ↗ with is the because there's so many

6:11 ↗ visions right we all have that this is

6:14 ↗ the implementation vision this is how we

6:16 ↗ get out of the gate and actually have

6:18 ↗ things happen and we had run the

6:21 ↗ original vision that sort of came

6:23 ↗ through the Joint Commission to the

6:25 ↗ council informally at their July meeting

6:28 ↗ and they thought it needed some oomph so

6:32 ↗ we went back through all the Joint

6:34 ↗ Commission discussions and things that

6:35 ↗ people said and and some of the some of

6:38 ↗ the debates and we thought we

6:41 ↗ even a lot more oomph so you'll have to

6:43 ↗ let us know if you think it's only

6:45 ↗ enough it's it's more it has more open

6:48 ↗ details than the original one by the

6:50 ↗ Joint Commission but counsel seemed

6:53 ↗ adamant that they really wanted it to

6:55 ↗ really really land a punch so this is

7:00 ↗ what we came up with the three problem

7:03 ↗ statements stayed the same because those

7:05 ↗ I think are perfect I might be biased

7:08 ↗ but I thought you all came up with I

7:10 ↗ thought you'd nailed it

7:13 ↗ and these are of course in the strategy

7:14 ↗ and these are where the the strategies

7:17 ↗ come from and these are the nine and

7:23 ↗ these again it took I think three

7:25 ↗ different meetings of the Joint

7:27 ↗ Commission to sort of get through them

7:31 ↗ fine-tune and they have been rewarded

7:36 ↗ and kind of because again we went in

7:38 ↗ July to Council and because they weren't

7:40 ↗ involved they had they didn't always

7:42 ↗ understand as clearly as we understood

7:44 ↗ that helped build them what they meant

7:47 ↗ so we did some fine-tuning after we

7:50 ↗ informally shared it with council in

7:52 ↗ July did you yes are these ordered in

7:55 ↗ any particular way oh good question

7:57 ↗ these are just how they came out of the

7:59 ↗ gate and just to unpack in in the

8:08 ↗ strategy in the housing strategy and now

8:11 ↗ they each are on a single page because

8:14 ↗ it was confusing to have some more than

8:16 ↗ one on a page we've heard that from

8:18 ↗ several individuals that it would be

8:20 ↗ better to be clear than to save a few

8:22 ↗ pages of paper but this is how they were

8:25 ↗ organized the strategy first stating

8:28 ↗ what it is that we want to do that we're

8:29 ↗ trying to achieve and then in the middle

8:31 ↗ there a description of why what the

8:33 ↗ history is why do we think it might be a

8:35 ↗ problem why do we think it could be a

8:37 ↗ solution sort of what's involved and

8:39 ↗ then some of the policy issues or

8:41 ↗ considerations that we'll need to go

8:44 ↗ through before we can actually come with

8:47 ↗ an implementation you know for a to use

8:49 ↗ should they be citywide should they not

8:52 ↗ be

8:52 ↗ should they still be considered not a

8:55 ↗ duplex but just as an accessory housing

8:58 ↗ unit not a full-blown duplex these are

9:00 ↗ things we haven't discussed yet we

9:02 ↗ haven't figured out yet but we know we

9:03 ↗ have to before we bring it back as a set

9:06 ↗ of code amendments but we wanted to try

9:08 ↗ and sort of throw out all the things

9:10 ↗ that we'd have to think about and

9:11 ↗ counsel will have to think about before

9:12 ↗ we could make the strategy come true

9:14 ↗ sort of so they know what their work

9:16 ↗ plan is that it's not like Oh next week

9:19 ↗ you're going to come before us with this

9:21 ↗ well no it's going to take a little bit

9:23 ↗ of research and figuring out to answer

9:25 ↗ the questions so then just to clarify

9:27 ↗ maybe for an understanding so what we're

9:29 ↗ recommending today and then what counsel

9:30 ↗ hopefully approved next time is that

9:33 ↗ they will say yes removing barriers to a

9:35 ↗ to use is something we want to do yes

9:37 ↗ and then there will still be the

9:38 ↗ additional process to figure out what

9:41 ↗ does that mean how do we do it and then

9:43 ↗ to go do it right that's what we're

9:46 ↗ hoping that would happen in that first

9:47 ↗ two years of the strategy as these would

9:50 ↗ all come up and be in some sort of a

9:53 ↗ solution whether it's a code amendment

9:54 ↗ something a program something so that we

9:57 ↗ can start monitoring how well we do

9:59 ↗ right and that will those discussions

10:03 ↗ will come through us right right right

10:06 ↗ oh quick question for as far as the

10:08 ↗ Polly issues policy issues I like the

10:10 ↗ way this document is written right now

10:12 ↗ is there a specific reason why those are

10:14 ↗ addressed as questions they another good

10:18 ↗ question they were when we first went to

10:21 ↗ Council we wanted them to know how big

10:24 ↗ some of these are and things that

10:26 ↗ they're going to have to consider before

10:28 ↗ they take action and when we when those

10:32 ↗ of you that worked on these saw them

10:34 ↗ you're not the first one that says why

10:35 ↗ are they in a question so we've sort of

10:38 ↗ rewritten them now that the council has

10:41 ↗ seen them informally to actually have

10:43 ↗ them as statements that that we should

10:46 ↗ consider this this and this we should

10:48 ↗ consider if they're all the

10:49 ↗ neighborhood's are just a few

10:51 ↗ neighborhoods instead of asking them as

10:52 ↗ a question because it's confusing

10:54 ↗ you're right it's confusing why won't we

10:56 ↗ given that draft isn't it just happened

11:00 ↗ three days ago okay

11:04 ↗ do did you find when you were going

11:06 ↗ through

11:08 ↗ I loved this seeing this document and

11:09 ↗ it's more of what I expected at our

11:11 ↗ first work session from the city and so

11:14 ↗ I'm curious if you could speak to a

11:15 ↗ little bit about how the city came to

11:17 ↗ these did you find that this was

11:18 ↗ drastically different from what you

11:20 ↗ thought when we started this this whole

11:22 ↗ project it was heavily influenced by me

11:26 ↗ I didn't have these these policy issues

11:28 ↗ the questions that we have in front of

11:30 ↗ us or were these things that the city

11:31 ↗ kind of knew was the guiding way how how

11:35 ↗ has this evolved is what I'm questioning

11:36 ↗ is how how has the city really evolved

11:39 ↗ this as we've gone through with public

11:40 ↗ comment and through the Commission's

11:42 ↗ well I'd say out of the nine that we

11:45 ↗ ended up with I mean there were 50 at

11:48 ↗ least that we that were on the table

11:49 ↗ before we narrowed it to nine because

11:52 ↗ there's so many that we're doing already

11:54 ↗ I didn't really know which we'd end up

11:58 ↗ with I knew probably three that we would

12:00 ↗ maybe four but the others I just sort of

12:03 ↗ came organically from talking to people

12:06 ↗ in which one sort of rose to the the

12:08 ↗ priority with the joint group and

12:10 ↗ through the surveys that we knew that we

12:12 ↗ needed to plug in some pieces so I don't

12:16 ↗ know if I was surprised I was pleased at

12:18 ↗ how much input we got from the focus

12:21 ↗ groups and from the survey that maybe

12:24 ↗ showed a different picture than some

12:25 ↗ people are used to seeing with us across

12:27 ↗ I was real happy with an example of the

12:29 ↗ difference between like you know should

12:31 ↗ the city consider ways to cooperate with

12:34 ↗ other cities versus like the statement

12:35 ↗ is that is basically are all questions

12:37 ↗ really in the affirmative how do we kind

12:40 ↗ of know which way that the staff has

12:42 ↗ gone with saying no we're not going to

12:43 ↗ work with others well we know for a fact

12:46 ↗ that and this is how we share it with

12:48 ↗ council that this ad use has come up as

12:51 ↗ a solution with other cities and so we

12:53 ↗ thought doesn't it make sense that we

12:55 ↗ would work with other cities we didn't

12:57 ↗ want to just assume that they would but

12:59 ↗ we thought that they would and so yes

13:03 ↗ sure Arthur from Earth

13:09 ↗ so I think you've asked I'm Arthur

13:12 ↗ Sullivan program manager of Archer could

13:14 ↗ you say your name in case them Arthur

13:16 ↗ Sullivan program manager of arch and

13:18 ↗ I've been assisting you and the joint

13:20 ↗ commissions and the staff your first

13:22 ↗ question is where did we come up with

13:24 ↗ these little policy issues I think is

13:26 ↗ was your first question and that was

13:28 ↗ sort of the result of a the experience

13:31 ↗ of working on these issues in the past

13:32 ↗ both city staff and our staff and we're

13:35 ↗ extension of your city staff listening

13:37 ↗ to the committee looking at the notes

13:39 ↗ from the Commission conversations and

13:40 ↗ listening to conversations from the

13:42 ↗ focus groups etc so we took all that

13:44 ↗ information and that helped us sort of

13:47 ↗ put these out there and what why we

13:49 ↗ shaped them as questions to start with

13:51 ↗ is when we went to council we wanted to

13:53 ↗ find out these are meant to help frame

13:56 ↗ the work as we go into each of the

13:59 ↗ strategies and they're meant to give a

14:01 ↗ little bit of guidance so that we know

14:03 ↗ what sort of the parameters the broad

14:05 ↗ parameters are that might be used as we

14:07 ↗ go into more detail on each of the

14:09 ↗ strategies so we went to council

14:11 ↗ originally we posed them as questions

14:14 ↗ and they had that meeting like say very

14:17 ↗ recently and we're now in the process

14:19 ↗ and it's sort of the same to you you can

14:23 ↗ still play around with these a little

14:24 ↗ bit what we're trying to do is after

14:26 ↗ these two conversations between Council

14:28 ↗ and the Commission is turn them into

14:30 ↗ statements based on your input okay and

14:33 ↗ we have had the council input and

14:35 ↗ there's some changing but not any

14:38 ↗ significant changes from the list that

14:40 ↗ you have in front of you based on some

14:43 ↗ of their input but for the most part

14:45 ↗ they seem to feel like we were in the

14:47 ↗ right ballpark with the policy guidance

14:50 ↗ thank you so is the idea that these

14:56 ↗ questions are all answered now no I wish

15:00 ↗ okay

15:01 ↗ because I like that there's still still

15:04 ↗ set as questions because I feel like the

15:06 ↗ act of answering this questions is the

15:08 ↗ process we're about ready to embark upon

15:10 ↗ right next year at two by no means of

15:12 ↗ these questions but ends these questions

15:14 ↗ have been identified and flushed out

15:16 ↗ right but by no means of these questions

15:18 ↗ been answered that's what we're gonna go

15:19 ↗ and try to tackle in the next year or

15:21 ↗ two

15:21 ↗ right

15:22 ↗ and the answers may surprise us they may

15:24 ↗ give us more questions which often

15:26 ↗ happens but at least this was sort of

15:29 ↗ the first way we thought of attacking

15:31 ↗ because these are you know they're hewed

15:33 ↗ the strategies some of them are huge so

15:35 ↗ it was sort of how do you start chipping

15:37 ↗ away at the pieces that we can because

15:39 ↗ it may turn out to lead into you know

15:42 ↗ tiny houses and backyards it may lead

15:45 ↗ into I mean it could lead into a lot of

15:47 ↗ things that right today for sure I've

15:49 ↗ been thinking about I just want to make

15:51 ↗ sure that when from a documentation is

15:53 ↗ ten point is these questions if you

15:54 ↗ convert these questions into statements

15:55 ↗ it's still clear that the particular

15:57 ↗ position the statement is taken is a

15:59 ↗ potential policy not right

16:03 ↗ and we call them policy considerations

16:05 ↗ because that seemed everyone still right

16:10 ↗ clear that say these are all proposed as

16:12 ↗ opposed to something that weren't we're

16:14 ↗ in Doren we're in endorsing the strategy

16:16 ↗ but not necessarily endorsing the

16:18 ↗ policies we're using what you guys have

16:20 ↗ created as our as our as our starting

16:22 ↗ board right to dive into it okay right

16:27 ↗ the actions that are also at the very

16:30 ↗ end talks about the timeline that as

16:34 ↗ staff we would figure out at least a

16:36 ↗ timeline and implementation for all of

16:38 ↗ them by April of next year that doesn't

16:41 ↗ mean they'll all be done but will at

16:43 ↗ least know with a nine how they all fit

16:44 ↗ into the two years for example two of

16:49 ↗ them one of them is going on now with a

16:52 ↗ transit-oriented development we're

16:54 ↗ working on that one now which is good

16:56 ↗ because that's one of the nine and the

16:58 ↗ other one that counsels asked us to

16:59 ↗ bring forward is I think it's number six

17:02 ↗ inclusionary zoning in central Issaquah

17:05 ↗ so that's one that they're hoping to

17:07 ↗ have done with your help of course it

17:10 ↗ has to go through you before the end of

17:12 ↗ the year when that moratorium is lifted

17:14 ↗ so those would be two that would be

17:17 ↗ hopefully on their way by the end of

17:19 ↗ this year which would make only nine

17:21 ↗ eight seven to do in the next two years

17:23 ↗ so we would just be really really

17:26 ↗ hitting it so we'd also figure out sort

17:31 ↗ of let the council know

17:33 ↗ that time what information do we need to

17:36 ↗ find what are we needing what's hard to

17:38 ↗ find what what new wrinkles have we

17:40 ↗ figured out that's sort of what number

17:42 ↗ two says is if there's other things that

17:45 ↗ we need to talk with a council committee

17:47 ↗ it would I think it would be services

17:48 ↗ and safety that would help us figure it

17:50 ↗ out and then we do the code revisions in

17:53 ↗ the next two years that you would help

17:54 ↗ with hello and then we would monitor the

17:58 ↗ strategies to see if how they're moving

18:01 ↗ the needle or if there's things that we

18:02 ↗ need to do or if some things aren't

18:04 ↗ working as well or if some things are

18:06 ↗ going gangbusters and we want to you

18:07 ↗ know put more resources we would start

18:09 ↗ monitoring that but at the end of next

18:13 ↗ year and then in 2022 we would revisit

18:16 ↗ the whole strategy again and see do we

18:18 ↗ stick with a nine are there ten more

18:20 ↗ that we want to try are there for we

18:22 ↗ want to get rid of you know that we

18:24 ↗ would revisit it and figure that out

18:26 ↗ depending on our success - number one

18:30 ↗ what does this look like on a commission

18:32 ↗ level and with public involvement for

18:34 ↗ developing and implementing these plans

18:37 ↗ is there any our will any more Joint

18:39 ↗ Commission's be had there will be any

18:41 ↗ more public input is this only happening

18:44 ↗ at city staff level I can you talk a

18:46 ↗ little more about one about that

18:47 ↗ development okay I think that just the

18:49 ↗ timeline would be figured out by staff

18:52 ↗ meaning that for example inclusionary

18:55 ↗ zoning we want to have done by the end

18:57 ↗ of the year we don't know what is all

18:59 ↗ involved in that yet we've thought about

19:01 ↗ how we could draft it

19:02 ↗ what kind of math needs to go into it to

19:05 ↗ see how how much you can require

19:07 ↗ something like that is kind of number

19:10 ↗ based we'll probably go out and talk to

19:12 ↗ developers on penciling out and that

19:15 ↗ kind of thing maybe the ATU one would be

19:18 ↗ next year and maybe that would take some

19:19 ↗ neighborhood discussion I think we would

19:22 ↗ try to put those into the timeline

19:23 ↗ before the timelines are figured out but

19:27 ↗ I think they would all take different

19:29 ↗ amounts of outreach and input and

19:31 ↗ depending on you know depending on the

19:34 ↗ strategy but I would imagine we would

19:37 ↗ need more input and more like not number

19:40 ↗ nine is for disabled and seniors and

19:45 ↗ special needs on a

19:46 ↗ sure we'll go back to the focus groups

19:48 ↗ and ask for help on that one just

19:50 ↗ because they provided so much good

19:52 ↗ information on the strategy itself we're

19:54 ↗ looking at this kind of two-year time

19:57 ↗ frame of really getting ramped up how

19:59 ↗ has there been any comments from Council

20:02 ↗ or any talk on city staff about

20:04 ↗ extension of the moratorium or no that's

20:07 ↗ done at the December yeah they made that

20:10 ↗ decision so how does that impact how we

20:13 ↗ are able to well impact really how does

20:18 ↗ that how are we able to when we're don't

20:19 ↗ really have these strategies in place

20:21 ↗ how does that really help us to move

20:23 ↗ forward to achieve our goals well we

20:24 ↗ would hope that if it works that

20:27 ↗ inclusionary zoning could be adopted by

20:30 ↗ the end of the year and the transit

20:31 ↗ oriented development will be on its way

20:33 ↗ it won't be done by the end of the year

20:35 ↗ but that would be - that would be in you

20:39 ↗ know in progress before it was lifted at

20:42 ↗ the end of December and then the other

20:43 ↗ ones we would just have to prioritize

20:44 ↗ you know which ones do we think we could

20:47 ↗ get done first but certainly permits

20:49 ↗ would be you know developers could be

20:51 ↗ coming in for permits in January sure

20:53 ↗ we've talked before about resources for

20:55 ↗ city staff and how we have to prioritize

20:56 ↗ based on what the city has how does that

20:59 ↗ impact kind of how we're able to move

21:01 ↗ through these timelines as far as I know

21:05 ↗ we've asked for we've talked about if

21:09 ↗ there's a need for more resources or how

21:12 ↗ we would get through it and we haven't

21:13 ↗ budget sessioning you know budget hasn't

21:16 ↗ started yet for the next year but there

21:19 ↗ certainly is a lot on our plate already

21:20 ↗ even just from the moratorium pieces

21:23 ↗ coming over and needing to be tidied up

21:25 ↗ in the code but we haven't had that

21:28 ↗ discussion yet although of course

21:30 ↗ everyone knows there's a lot still going

21:32 ↗ on even after the moratorium is lifted

21:34 ↗ thank you

21:40 ↗ wanted you all to know you probably

21:44 ↗ already noticed that but for the public

21:46 ↗ to know that in the appendix we put the

21:49 ↗ complan vision and goals that relate to

21:51 ↗ housing we thought about putting the

21:54 ↗ whole housing element in there but

21:55 ↗ didn't know if that was over the top

21:57 ↗ although it's a fabulous element we also

21:59 ↗ have the table in the housing in the

22:02 ↗ land-use element that talks about the

22:04 ↗ housing target and has the most recent

22:06 ↗ count towards the 2030 one adopted state

22:10 ↗ target so that's in there and see is the

22:13 ↗ affordable housing report card back from

22:15 ↗ 2015 so we've been working on housing

22:19 ↗ and affordable housing for quite a while

22:20 ↗ it's just a really tough nut to crack I

22:22 ↗ think everyone in the region is

22:24 ↗ struggling with it

22:25 ↗ but I wanted that to be in there just

22:27 ↗ sort of as another baseline of all the

22:29 ↗ work that has gone on already and that

22:31 ↗ we've already been involved in and that

22:34 ↗ we're still trying to be creative and

22:35 ↗ try new things and try to do the old

22:37 ↗ things in a different way and so that's

22:39 ↗ why those are all included they're the

22:43 ↗ next steps for the fresh just I'm just

22:46 ↗ curious I'm the I'm the appendix that as

22:49 ↗ the the housing units do you guys have

22:51 ↗ anything in terms of new units that are

22:54 ↗ in the pipeline yes I was just curious

22:59 ↗ is that is that in here is that I know

23:01 ↗ that wouldn't be a comprehensive plan

23:03 ↗ okay because it's can you it's can you a

23:06 ↗ ballpark about how many do we have

23:08 ↗ because I'm like because I'm looking at

23:09 ↗ how many we have 2,300 to meet the

23:12 ↗ target how much of that is covered by

23:14 ↗ our current pipeline there's a

23:16 ↗ completely governs in your strategy 13

23:27 ↗ yes you got there before I did and

23:29 ↗ there's a little line way over on the

23:33 ↗ right-hand to the dotted line it's the

23:36 ↗ line that says 2021 or 2022 housing

23:41 ↗ target reached so that housing target is

23:45 ↗ the 2035 target 31 2013 one target okay

23:51 ↗ and it looks like we would meet it I

23:54 ↗ sort of put the line sort of in a

23:59 ↗ because even though they're in the

24:01 ↗ pipeline you never know when there's

24:03 ↗ some may not this was sort of the guess

24:08 ↗ as to how we're growing how we have

24:10 ↗ grown and sort of the the forecast if we

24:13 ↗ if we're still going at 8% what that

24:15 ↗ would be okay all right

24:17 ↗ thank you I was curious off of that

24:19 ↗ Trish I don't know if you're able to

24:21 ↗ speak to specifically that those units

24:23 ↗ needed to meet our target if you

24:25 ↗ anticipated those looking at basically

24:28 ↗ where we are right now is two patches of

24:30 ↗ open land and usable land if you foresee

24:32 ↗ those units being mostly in urban

24:33 ↗ villages or if they're going to be in

24:35 ↗ central Issaquah we would hope that

24:37 ↗ they'd be in central Issaquah the lion's

24:39 ↗ share of them the villages are pretty

24:40 ↗ well spoken for with their entitlement

24:43 ↗ and so we've always hoped that the

24:45 ↗ lion's share would go in central

24:47 ↗ Issaquah thank you the next steps for

24:52 ↗ the Housing Strategy which is the piece

24:54 ↗ before you tonight would be the public

24:57 ↗ hearing tonight listening to comments

25:00 ↗ discussing and deliberating and if you

25:03 ↗ feel comfortable moving it forward to

25:05 ↗ Council and then they would have their

25:07 ↗ action in September and October and then

25:09 ↗ your first implementation piece could be

25:13 ↗ coming as early as October 26th for a

25:16 ↗ public hearing and that would be the

25:18 ↗ requirement right now that the urban

25:21 ↗ core of central Issaquah already

25:23 ↗ requires affordable housing and this

25:25 ↗ would be modifying that a little bit

25:30 ↗ we don't know completely what the draft

25:32 ↗ is yet because we've been doing the

25:33 ↗ strategy and that would let council be

25:37 ↗ able to that would allow them perhaps to

25:38 ↗ take action on that in December so

25:40 ↗ they're sort of I wanted to sort of give

25:42 ↗ you a peak that if all those well we

25:45 ↗ might have some implementation by the

25:47 ↗ end of the year are there questions

25:50 ↗ before we open it up to the public I'm

25:52 ↗ sorry the inclusionary zoning which

25:54 ↗ strategy is that I believe it six

25:57 ↗ require more affordable housing

25:59 ↗ [Music]

26:01 ↗ okay so the term developed provided

26:04 ↗ correct that's then in in in theory that

26:08 ↗ the tool would be inclusionary zoning

26:10 ↗ correct and that would answer the six

26:13 ↗ point one should the city look to

26:15 ↗ increase inclusionary requirements in

26:17 ↗ central Issaquah where are you reading

26:19 ↗ then page 21 okay cuz that laying what

26:22 ↗ that language is a bit different than

26:23 ↗ the page seventeen 6.10 you're in 6.0 K

26:33 ↗ all right thank you are you ready for

26:36 ↗ the public eye I want to make a couple

26:39 ↗ comments first first of all welcome back

26:42 ↗ we haven't seen you in a month and a

26:44 ↗ half so we missed you

26:50 ↗ it's a huge undertaking that the city is

26:54 ↗ planning to do and I understand that

26:56 ↗ there aren't 50,000 people out there

26:59 ↗ working on this so it's you know I don't

27:01 ↗ like that two to five year plan but you

27:04 ↗ know things go slowly the only thing

27:07 ↗ that I'm a little concerned about is all

27:11 ↗ of this growth is supposedly in the

27:14 ↗ central area and the central area is

27:17 ↗ composed of individual ah'd of it is

27:19 ↗ individual homes there's not a lot of

27:23 ↗ land that you can just put all of this

27:26 ↗ stuff in that we all need and it would

27:29 ↗ be nice to have some kind of a vision of

27:33 ↗ well you know this is how much land we

27:36 ↗ have and this is our vision for what we

27:38 ↗ want it to look like how do we get all

27:40 ↗ this land in that particular amount of

27:43 ↗ space to me that seems like a better

27:46 ↗ idea than just say I want to implement

27:48 ↗ all these plans and of course they're

27:50 ↗ all good we all want them I mean you

27:53 ↗ have good questions but they all can't

27:57 ↗ happen there can't be enough workforce

28:01 ↗ housing for everybody

28:03 ↗ you know all of this can't happen and so

28:06 ↗ to me I would like to see some kind of a

28:09 ↗ plan for hey the central area is only so

28:13 ↗ big and as

28:14 ↗ are they full where are you going to put

28:15 ↗ all this extra stuff that we really need

28:17 ↗ so how do you make those plans the other

28:21 ↗ comment is in second strategy 3 you're

28:27 ↗ talking about affordable multifamily

28:29 ↗ projects and one of the things that you

28:34 ↗ sentence preservation as included both

28:38 ↗ preserving privately owned federally

28:40 ↗ subsidized housing that could be

28:42 ↗ converted to market rate housing I mean

28:46 ↗ I would be very disappointed if if there

28:48 ↗ was federally funded subsidized housing

28:52 ↗ for a family to go in and then live

28:57 ↗ there for two years and then be able to

28:59 ↗ get the difference between the value

29:03 ↗ that they got and now it is now at

29:05 ↗ market rate and so when you're doing

29:08 ↗ plans in there there has to be a

29:11 ↗ provision in there to limit what you can

29:15 ↗ sell it for you know based on some

29:18 ↗ something there was one area in the

29:23 ↗ highlands that forgot that and so you

29:27 ↗ know my client bought it at 300 which

29:29 ↗ was great for them but they sold it for

29:31 ↗ 500 and that just doesn't seem to be

29:34 ↗ reasonable so okay so what I'm going to

29:36 ↗ do is open up the public hearing and to

29:39 ↗ hear what all of you think about the

29:43 ↗ plans and I know the first person opened

29:47 ↗ the public hearing is 705 and the first

29:49 ↗ person up to speak tonight is Randy

29:52 ↗ Banneker go to and introduce yourself

30:05 ↗ thank you miss Perla and members of the

30:07 ↗ Commission I'm Randy Banneker I'm here

30:09 ↗ on behalf of the Seattle King County

30:11 ↗ Realtors appreciate the opportunity to

30:13 ↗ to speak with you tonight

30:16 ↗ our members certainly place a high value

30:19 ↗ on the opportunity to to represent

30:21 ↗ buyers and sellers in the City of the

30:23 ↗ Issaquah and we're here because we

30:26 ↗ believe it's in our mutual interest to

30:27 ↗ ensure the quality of this community

30:29 ↗ moving forward and your work your work

30:32 ↗ on housing is very much appreciated and

30:35 ↗ extremely important ensuring an adequate

30:38 ↗ supply of quality housing relative to

30:40 ↗ demand is is both challenging and

30:42 ↗ critical to the health of Issaquah and

30:45 ↗ the greater region in the draft strategy

30:47 ↗ that staff has presented to you tonight

30:49 ↗ that you've been working on you have

30:52 ↗ identified the key issues and you're

30:54 ↗ absolutely on the right track of

30:55 ↗ tackling the questions that are going to

30:57 ↗ be relevant to to the challenges

31:00 ↗ Issaquah faces in our view that chief

31:03 ↗ focus of the city needs to be on how you

31:05 ↗ will zone to enable new housing supply

31:09 ↗ increasing housing supply and responsive

31:11 ↗ demand is the only true path to housing

31:14 ↗ affordability to family earning the

31:17 ↗ median income can't afford the median

31:19 ↗ price home a family earning less than

31:22 ↗ that or mean eighty percent or thirty

31:23 ↗ percent of that median income will have

31:25 ↗ an even tougher time affording housing

31:28 ↗ so I have ticked off I went through your

31:31 ↗ nine strategies and I just wanted to

31:34 ↗ give you a quick flavor and and comments

31:37 ↗ on those number one removing barriers to

31:42 ↗ facilitate more ad use absolutely this

31:46 ↗ is an extremely important strategy it

31:49 ↗ does a number of things chiefly it

31:51 ↗ creates affordable rental housing

31:55 ↗ workforce housing potentially in the

31:57 ↗ city

31:58 ↗ the rental stream from those eighty used

32:01 ↗ to the to the owner of the primary

32:03 ↗ residence can help buy down their

32:05 ↗ mortgage you know help make that

32:07 ↗ mortgage more affordable to them so it

32:08 ↗ is an affordability strategy there for

32:11 ↗ seniors which you talk about later

32:13 ↗ strategy ad use can be again a tool for

32:17 ↗ a little income stream and it can also

32:19 ↗ have someone on the property who's just

32:22 ↗ there and may be available to help if

32:24 ↗ that person needs some help but at some

32:27 ↗ point in time strategy two approaches to

32:31 ↗ limit and mitigate tear downs we're

32:34 ↗ concerned about that it looks good on

32:36 ↗ paper but I think in practice it's tough

32:38 ↗ to do in a way that gives flexibility

32:41 ↗ for your existing owners to keep their

32:43 ↗ home's current up-to-date and relevant

32:45 ↗ to to the marketplace a strategy 3 which

32:50 ↗ seeks out affordable multifamily

32:52 ↗ projects for retention I think that's a

32:56 ↗ great thing if the city of Issaquah is

32:58 ↗ wanting to invest in existing

32:59 ↗ multifamily projects this is a very cost

33:02 ↗ effective strategy for preservation of

33:05 ↗ what would I assume be subsidized or

33:08 ↗ income qualified units identifying

33:12 ↗ additional funding options for

33:14 ↗ affordable housing we put a qualified

33:16 ↗ YES on that with the notion that the the

33:22 ↗ provision the development the funding

33:24 ↗ for affordable housing ought to have a

33:27 ↗ wide catchment it ought to be regional

33:29 ↗ funding or citywide funding it ought not

33:31 ↗ to be a very narrow burden that's placed

33:34 ↗ on a builder or the buyer of that new

33:37 ↗ unit it's a citywide responsibility and

33:40 ↗ I think it deserves a citywide response

33:42 ↗ a tool there that you you flag is the

33:45 ↗ use of the multifamily tax exemption

33:48 ↗ program that's a great thing

33:50 ↗ keep that in mind that brings the market

33:52 ↗ market incentives into the provision of

33:55 ↗ affordable income qualified units

33:58 ↗ strategy 5 you're talking about transit

34:01 ↗ oriented development pursue this one

34:03 ↗ this is really important you're gonna

34:04 ↗ get increased transit benefits in the

34:07 ↗ city transit transit stations transit

34:12 ↗ centers is where you should be zoning

34:14 ↗ your densest

34:16 ↗ housing because again it gives people

34:18 ↗ flexibility to live to live in Issaquah

34:20 ↗ without necessarily owning a car

34:22 ↗ full-time because they can access the

34:25 ↗ transit

34:26 ↗ strategy six is increasing developer

34:28 ↗ provided affordable housing in central

34:31 ↗ Issaquah tread carefully on that the

34:34 ↗ term to me is misleading because

34:37 ↗ developer provided housing ultimately

34:40 ↗ the buyer of that housing is the payer

34:43 ↗ it's not some magic gift that's coming

34:45 ↗ from the developer and and that buyer is

34:48 ↗ then paying more for that market rate

34:51 ↗ unit making that unit more expensive as

34:55 ↗ a result of the inclusionary requirement

34:57 ↗ an added risk of an inclusionary formula

35:01 ↗ that is not done well to market could

35:05 ↗ mean that the project doesn't pencil

35:08 ↗ it's not economically feasible because

35:10 ↗ the because of the cost of the

35:12 ↗ inclusionary requirement and as a result

35:16 ↗ that project could be delayed which then

35:21 ↗ delays the production of the needed

35:23 ↗ housing units for the community you just

35:26 ↗ have to be careful and it's it's

35:28 ↗ something that Seattle Seattle has has

35:31 ↗ implemented through the hala process

35:35 ↗ various inclusionary type programs

35:37 ↗ incentives zoning things like that and

35:39 ↗ they're constantly tackling where to set

35:43 ↗ the dials on how much that that

35:46 ↗ developer should pay for those

35:47 ↗ privileges it's tough strategy eight is

35:52 ↗ o strategy seven addressing the

35:55 ↗ condominium liability issue we'd love to

35:59 ↗ work with you on that that is a huge

36:01 ↗ problem it is a problem for every

36:03 ↗ jurisdiction in well every jurisdiction

36:05 ↗ in urban King County it's a statewide

36:08 ↗ problem with the condominium act we need

36:11 ↗ to work together to address that

36:13 ↗ condominiums offer the greatest

36:14 ↗ opportunity for affordable ownership

36:17 ↗ housing for that first getting on that

36:18 ↗ first rung of Housing Strategy eight is

36:21 ↗ incorporating code revisions to increase

36:25 ↗ potential density of housing types

36:26 ↗ absolutely alternative housing types in

36:29 ↗ the city's smaller housing types again

36:31 ↗ are gonna offer some affordability that

36:33 ↗ isn't there already can be done nicely

36:36 ↗ to blend in the community

36:37 ↗ and then lastly supporting housing

36:39 ↗ options and services to enable people to

36:42 ↗ stay in their homes or neighborhood

36:44 ↗ that's that's important too it's

36:46 ↗ important to identify quantify who and

36:50 ↗ how many people need help need that

36:53 ↗ subsidy identify where those dreams of

36:56 ↗ subsidy you're going to come and and

36:58 ↗ deliver it to them but make it make it

36:59 ↗ real and understandable so I thank you

37:01 ↗ for your attention

37:03 ↗ and we would love to work with you on on

37:05 ↗ all these strategies as they play out

37:07 ↗ and ask a question yes I know you work

37:09 ↗ with the other cities Kirkland Bellevue

37:12 ↗ is is or any of those cities doing

37:16 ↗ anything that just pops out as being

37:19 ↗ unbelievably awesome in providing

37:22 ↗ housing for their constituents well I

37:24 ↗ think I think you're seeing and this

37:28 ↗ this is not in contrast to Issaquah but

37:31 ↗ you know what should the the multifamily

37:33 ↗ development the kind of development

37:34 ↗ you're seeing in Bellevue reflectable of

37:37 ↗ a little different market but Bellevue

37:38 ↗ set its sights on some some aggressive

37:42 ↗ zoning allowances some height allowances

37:45 ↗ and it took many years but those are

37:48 ↗ coming to fruition

37:51 ↗ you wouldn't I don't think you want to

37:53 ↗ be a downtown Bellevue but I think

37:54 ↗ that's a models of the zone that you set

37:56 ↗ now the zoning ideas the concepts look

38:00 ↗ out 20 years 20 years is your GMA time

38:03 ↗ frame

38:04 ↗ look out you can look out 50 years and

38:06 ↗ think about what this city wants to look

38:08 ↗ like and how it can support your

38:10 ↗ developing employment base that's going

38:12 ↗ to be important to Kirkland is a good

38:15 ↗ example of looking at how to how to

38:18 ↗ pivot off of the downtown amenities in

38:20 ↗ terms of multifamily and I'm talking

38:22 ↗ about market rate housing principally

38:23 ↗ pivoting off the the lake and the and

38:27 ↗ the downtown you've got an amazing

38:29 ↗ downtown there are probably some things

38:30 ↗ you could look at off these off these

38:33 ↗ central retail blocks thank you thank

38:36 ↗ you

38:37 ↗ anybody else like to

38:41 ↗ I'm to the micro come to the microphone

38:44 ↗ and introduce yourself please

38:53 ↗ my name is Karen Tennyson and I don't

38:56 ↗ live in Issaquah I just moved to Redmond

38:58 ↗ but I was on the Kirkland planning

39:00 ↗ commission for eight years and I've been

39:03 ↗ involved with imagined housing and the

39:05 ↗ Housing Alliance for providing

39:07 ↗ affordable housing and when I was on the

39:10 ↗ Planning Commission in Kirkland we

39:12 ↗ undertook a number of things one was a

39:14 ↗ tea use another was a small lot strategy

39:17 ↗ for old for people who'd lived in their

39:19 ↗ home for a long time but it had a huge

39:21 ↗ lot and being allowing them to subdivide

39:25 ↗ to have a smaller lot but this smaller

39:28 ↗ effe are for it and we also did a lot of

39:33 ↗ innovative housing Redmond I like

39:36 ↗ because they have inclusionary housing

39:38 ↗ and I will tell you that you cannot

39:41 ↗ incentivize affordable housing enough to

39:45 ↗ get anyone to build it a regular

39:47 ↗ developer you have to make it

39:50 ↗ inclusionary and then it happens so

39:54 ↗ thank you thank you would anybody else

39:58 ↗ like to speak Elizabeth Elizabeth no

40:04 ↗ Penn Human Services Commission one of

40:09 ↗ the things that strikes me is that as

40:14 ↗ you're doing some more research in how

40:20 ↗ to get what you need it would be really

40:24 ↗ helpful if Ithaca had a day Center for

40:29 ↗ our residents who are either homeless or

40:33 ↗ on the edge this would be an opportunity

40:37 ↗ for us to find out what the obstacles

40:41 ↗ are to their being housed in Issaquah

40:45 ↗ what changes really need to be made to

40:50 ↗ have that population housed and we can

40:53 ↗ look at the subsidized housing that we

40:59 ↗ already have the affordable housing

41:02 ↗ projects

41:03 ↗ and send people out we could have a

41:07 ↗ cadre of volunteers who go out in both

41:10 ↗ interview the management and the

41:13 ↗ residents and find out what best

41:17 ↗ practices there are that make for

41:21 ↗ affordable housing that people really

41:24 ↗ want to live in so that all of our

41:29 ↗ residents are living in housing that's

41:32 ↗ not only affordable to them but

41:36 ↗ appreciated by them I think this will

41:39 ↗ strengthen our community we have to find

41:44 ↗ ways we're so far behind on the

41:50 ↗ affordable housing I think that needs to

41:53 ↗ be a particular priority and we need to

41:57 ↗ find a way to integrate it in a way that

42:01 ↗ allows people of diverse income levels

42:07 ↗ to know and understand each other and to

42:10 ↗ really live joyously in this community

42:16 ↗ thank you have any questions

42:30 ↗ hi steeper ah so several thoughts as I

42:34 ↗ looked through this or heard about the

42:36 ↗ read the discussion remove barriers

42:40 ↗ processing costs for 80 years I'm not

42:42 ↗ sure that that's a good thing that

42:45 ↗ benefits making affordable housing

42:48 ↗ happen it just makes it lower cost and

42:50 ↗ other housing but it's not really per se

42:52 ↗ affordable housing by other standards

42:54 ↗ I'm just concerned with kind of losing

42:57 ↗ that the idea of this sixty percent 80

43:00 ↗ percent 9 percent 100 percent cost ratio

43:06 ↗ strategy to

43:20 ↗ so one of the things it seems when I

43:23 ↗ talked about heard about the is Issaquah

43:25 ↗ Highlands it seems like there was a

43:26 ↗ requirement for a 30% affordable housing

43:29 ↗ stock and I'd like to see that concept

43:33 ↗ that idea of having a minimum affordable

43:35 ↗ stock of housing for the central

43:38 ↗ Issaquah plan for new development that

43:40 ↗ goes in for housing I don't think that

43:43 ↗ was a policy - per se and another

43:48 ↗ thought that occurs to me is that when

43:50 ↗ we talk about what's currently the

43:52 ↗ affordable stock kind of product of the

43:53 ↗ Old Town neighborhood area I would like

43:57 ↗ to see the city of the City Council is

43:59 ↗ currently indicated or extended the

44:01 ↗ moratorium to December of this year I'd

44:03 ↗ like to see that extended for the at

44:05 ↗ least for the downtown area for a more

44:09 ↗ term to continue to maintain or keep

44:12 ↗ that affordable stock of housing I'd

44:14 ↗ less so I'd like to see the PPC make a

44:16 ↗ recommendation to extend the moratorium

44:18 ↗ for the Old Town neighborhood area so

44:20 ↗ that we don't lose any more of that

44:21 ↗ existing stock while that moratorium is

44:24 ↗ in place because as soon as it goes away

44:27 ↗ then you can submit a permit and that

44:30 ↗ gives you a vested rights to tear down

44:33 ↗ or eliminate that existing small stock

44:35 ↗ of housing I agree with the idea I would

44:43 ↗ like to see one of the things that

44:44 ↗ talked about is a fun for city of is

44:49 ↗ quad for I guess basically raise taxes

44:52 ↗ or revenue to have affordable housing

44:55 ↗ that's kind of a strategy go on how we

44:58 ↗ go about that doing and how we raise

44:59 ↗ funds and how much funds we could manage

45:02 ↗ but I do think that needs to be part of

45:03 ↗ the discussion as far as a solution

45:04 ↗ thanks

45:17 ↗ and I'm Mary Lynch live at 269 o North

45:20 ↗ West Oak Crest Drive Issaquah Washington

45:21 ↗ and I just want to say thank you for I

45:24 ↗ think there's a lot of work has been

45:25 ↗ done and a lot of meetings held and I

45:27 ↗ think we as dressed earlier that the

45:30 ↗ points have all been addressed now's the

45:32 ↗ time for making sure that it does get

45:34 ↗ implemented and the codes get written

45:36 ↗ correctly around that because our

45:38 ↗ history and doing that has not been

45:40 ↗ really good especially when it comes to

45:42 ↗ the central area plan so my concern is

45:45 ↗ kind of with what Steve was saying is we

45:49 ↗ need this for the central area plan and

45:51 ↗ to raise the moratorium before some of

45:52 ↗ this stuff is done I'm a little bit

45:54 ↗ concerned because one of the reasons why

45:56 ↗ we had the moratorium is we weren't

45:58 ↗ getting what we wanted and I really

46:00 ↗ think since we're close to our numbers

46:03 ↗ on what we need in 2030 that to rush

46:07 ↗ ahead and lift the moratorium without

46:09 ↗ some of these things in place I think is

46:11 ↗ jumping the gun because we need to make

46:14 ↗ sure we do it right going forward

46:16 ↗ because we're not going to have a lot of

46:17 ↗ land to redo it

46:19 ↗ you know available and as Steve said

46:22 ↗ especially in Old Town I know I've

46:24 ↗ talked to a lot of those people down

46:25 ↗ there and they live in the smaller older

46:27 ↗ houses and they're just you know don't

46:31 ↗ know what to do because they've lived

46:32 ↗ there they've had views that are now

46:34 ↗ blocked they've had you know land that's

46:37 ↗ now their neighbors are you know

46:40 ↗ basically almost zero lot line with

46:42 ↗ what's been allowed to happen in three

46:44 ↗ and four-story tall buildings next to

46:46 ↗ the older family homes so even if they

46:49 ↗ wanted to age in place you know the

46:51 ↗ quality of life has gone down and so I

46:53 ↗ think some of the things we need to look

46:55 ↗ at especially without Old Town is some

46:57 ↗ zoning that will look at what really

47:00 ↗ should be there and do we want to keep

47:02 ↗ the character of what's in Old Town or

47:03 ↗ do we want to just blow it up and do

47:06 ↗ something different so whatever we do

47:08 ↗ going forward if we want to keep some of

47:10 ↗ the stuff in Old Town we need to make

47:13 ↗ sure that we have the codes in place to

47:15 ↗ control that the other thing I want to

47:17 ↗ say is the 90 percent is that my buzzer

47:22 ↗ okay the other thing I want to say is it

47:27 ↗ talks about a 90,000 median

47:30 ↗ income and the thing that I really want

47:33 ↗ to concern you is over the past five to

47:35 ↗ six years I know more people that have

47:37 ↗ had to move south and out of Issaquah

47:40 ↗ but are still working here and doing the

47:42 ↗ lower paid jobs or service jobs but they

47:44 ↗ couldn't afford the rent so they've

47:46 ↗ moved further south and I think that

47:49 ↗ when you're looking at 90 percent or 90

47:52 ↗ K most of your workforce here is lower

47:56 ↗ service industry you've got some

47:59 ↗ executives with Costco and you've got

48:03 ↗ some that's left with Microsoft but

48:05 ↗ you've really look at the workforce here

48:07 ↗ you've got teachers you've got firemen

48:09 ↗ you've got school bus drivers

48:12 ↗ you've got service people who are not at

48:14 ↗ that 90 percent even with two incomes so

48:17 ↗ you really need to look at I think look

48:21 ↗ at that as being lower and how do we get

48:24 ↗ our workforce back into Issaquah if we

48:26 ↗ get a workforce back in Issaquah that'll

48:28 ↗ help the traffic a lot so I think that

48:32 ↗ the schedule I would like to see it

48:34 ↗ sooner than later but if we can't get it

48:36 ↗ done sooner I really think we need to

48:39 ↗ talk to the City Council and say and we

48:41 ↗ need to hold off on the moratorium or

48:44 ↗ just prolong that until we get it right

48:47 ↗ so we can control our growth thank you

48:50 ↗ anybody else like to speak

49:06 ↗ hello my name is Peggy Foster I live at

49:09 ↗ 2:00 to 5:00 for Newport Way Northwest

49:11 ↗ I'm also a realtor and I agree with a

49:14 ↗ lot of the things Randy said with regard

49:17 ↗ to the strategy one I'm curious do do

49:21 ↗ most homeowners even know that they have

49:22 ↗ the ability to build an Adu because I

49:24 ↗ didn't realize that it was a possibility

49:26 ↗ and what is the city doing to educate

49:29 ↗ people so that they can do these things

49:31 ↗ and is there an incentive for homeowners

49:35 ↗ to build a to use to take on that kind

49:37 ↗ of project and then on strategy 2 I

49:41 ↗ believe that the city should get

49:43 ↗ involved to the extent that the

49:44 ↗ neighborhood retains its present

49:46 ↗ character I think that that's so

49:47 ↗ important that's why a lot of us live

49:50 ↗ here because of the character of this

49:52 ↗ this area I think there should be

49:54 ↗ allowances and incidents to create

49:56 ↗ multi-family homes like a duplex or a

49:58 ↗ triplex and I think demolitions should

50:01 ↗ be considered only when the property is

50:03 ↗ beyond reasonable repair or remodel in

50:07 ↗ other words don't tear down a perfectly

50:09 ↗ good home just to replace it with a

50:11 ↗ larger newer model I think on strategy 3

50:17 ↗ about local resources I think that this

50:20 ↗ is a great opportunity especially in

50:22 ↗ creating cohousing this is a model that

50:25 ↗ would appeal especially to senior

50:27 ↗ homeowners who one don't want to leave

50:28 ↗ their home they want to stay there and

50:31 ↗ yet they'd have the benefit of having

50:32 ↗ another family or another person living

50:34 ↗ on the property so I think Randy was

50:36 ↗ right on target with that and that would

50:38 ↗ be a great opportunity for shared equity

50:40 ↗ allowing another party to buy in on an

50:42 ↗ existing home instead of renting as far

50:48 ↗ as number seven mitigating deterrence to

50:52 ↗ condo construction I would love to see a

50:55 ↗ requirement for the inclusion of

50:57 ↗ mixed-use space I think that that was

50:59 ↗ discussed once upon a time in the

51:02 ↗ central area central hezekiah plan and

51:04 ↗ I'd love to see that incorporated and

51:08 ↗ then on number 8

51:11 ↗ what about code provisions for allowing

51:12 ↗ existing homes so this is my question

51:15 ↗ what about a code provision that allows

51:18 ↗ existing homes to be retrofitted to be

51:22 ↗ like a duplex or triplex again keeping

51:24 ↗ with the character of the neighborhood

51:25 ↗ and that would be a fantastic

51:27 ↗ opportunity for Co housing and I

51:30 ↗ appreciate you letting me make these

51:31 ↗ these comments and some of my

51:33 ↗ observations every day we hear something

51:36 ↗ in the news about our housing crisis

51:38 ↗ right every day even in Bremerton I

51:41 ↗ heard this on KN KX the other day

51:44 ↗ yesterday so people that work in Seattle

51:47 ↗ are moving to Bremerton because of the

51:48 ↗ affordability and with that fast ferry

51:51 ↗ that's going to make it even more

51:52 ↗ desirable but the people that live in

51:55 ↗ Burton are now having to compete for the

51:57 ↗ lower you know the more affordable homes

51:59 ↗ so that's not really working I guess we

52:02 ↗ all know from that article in the Puget

52:05 ↗ Sound Business Journal the Seattle is

52:07 ↗ the ninth fastest growing Metro in the

52:09 ↗ nation gaining what eleven hundred

52:11 ↗ residents per week that's a crazy number

52:15 ↗ so what this tells me it's time for a

52:17 ↗ paradigm shift in the housing market and

52:19 ↗ one idea that I think is worth

52:22 ↗ mentioning is Urban cohousing with

52:24 ↗ intentional planning and use of space we

52:26 ↗ could retrofit existing properties to

52:28 ↗ accommodate more families this would

52:31 ↗ essentially be attractive to seniors

52:33 ↗ wanting to age in place and Millennials

52:35 ↗ that want to stay within the city limits

52:37 ↗ of course it's going to take some

52:39 ↗ forward-thinking individuals to create

52:42 ↗ some alternative housing solutions that

52:45 ↗ people will buy into and we see it's

52:48 ↗ already happening and companies like Co

52:51 ↗ buy are helping to facilitate this so if

52:54 ↗ we look at what uber has done for local

52:56 ↗ transportation and what Airbnb has done

52:59 ↗ for hotel accommodations

53:00 ↗ can you imagine what Co housing might do

53:03 ↗ for our demand here so I appreciate you

53:07 ↗ listening things there anyone else who

53:11 ↗ would like to speak tonight is there

53:15 ↗ anyone else who would like to speak

53:17 ↗ tonight

53:19 ↗ being none I will call the public

53:22 ↗ hearing closed that seven-day night I

53:29 ↗ I'll open up to you first you guys have

53:31 ↗ any additional comments or questions

53:34 ↗ answers I do have a concern as we are

53:40 ↗ looking at some of these questions about

53:43 ↗ creating incentives for development I do

53:46 ↗ not believe that we should have or allow

53:49 ↗ for incentives on new identity

53:53 ↗ development I think we need to mandate

53:55 ↗ that if we if we create and set up for

54:01 ↗ it and we're not allowing capitalism to

54:08 ↗ work so if we we need to create a

54:15 ↗ framework that says this is a

54:18 ↗ requirement I don't believe that we

54:21 ↗ should be incentivizing those kinds of

54:23 ↗ requirements they should be baked in to

54:27 ↗ another reason why I do not believe we

54:29 ↗ should be increasing the incentives is

54:31 ↗ because that means we're gonna have to

54:32 ↗ increase your taxes I do not believe

54:34 ↗ that we should increase property tax or

54:37 ↗ to fund incentives for affordable

54:40 ↗ housing because what that does is if we

54:42 ↗ have seniors that are living in their

54:44 ↗ homes now there aren't fixed incomes and

54:46 ↗ we raise property tax we're making that

54:49 ↗ investment for them less affordable so

54:53 ↗ those are my concern yes

54:59 ↗ Trish I was curious how does the city

55:04 ↗ feel like these strategies are really

55:05 ↗ addressing the increase in homeless

55:08 ↗ populations we've seen in our community

55:10 ↗ specifically we had numbers for the

55:12 ↗ single day census that was taken

55:14 ↗ regarding homeless children in our

55:16 ↗ school district when we think about

55:18 ↗ strategies we discussed about housing

55:21 ↗ specifically targeted to single mothers

55:23 ↗ having

55:25 ↗ talked about a variety of different

55:26 ↗ housing styles that aren't necessarily

55:28 ↗ traditional to be able to accommodate

55:31 ↗ families to be able to kind of get put

55:33 ↗ themselves up and kind of help them

55:36 ↗ through being at those lower income

55:39 ↗ brackets I'm not seeing any strategies

55:41 ↗ that really address that's one of the

55:43 ↗ population right that would be number

55:45 ↗ nine talks about homeless and transition

55:49 ↗ and and again we don't know how that

55:51 ↗ will work because we haven't dug in to

55:53 ↗ find out all the different options all

55:56 ↗ the different partners we just know that

55:59 ↗ it's an issue we haven't we haven't

56:01 ↗ figured out how to solve it yet it's

56:02 ↗ still a strategy sure Arthur Sullivan

56:11 ↗ again program manager of arch so Therese

56:15 ↗ is correct at number nine specifically

56:17 ↗ calls out homelessness but you'll also

56:20 ↗ see you know when you get to

56:21 ↗ homelessness and councilmember

56:24 ↗ silverstein pointed this out when we

56:26 ↗ were talking with them is that when you

56:28 ↗ get into the arena of homelessness

56:29 ↗ you're not dealing about just housing

56:31 ↗ you're dealing with a lot of service

56:32 ↗ issues as well often so there's an

56:34 ↗ overlap between the whole human services

56:36 ↗ efforts which the city is involved in as

56:38 ↗ well as housing and this plan is more

56:42 ↗ about the housing component but number

56:44 ↗ nine gets at understanding the

56:46 ↗ complexity of homelessness and the

56:47 ↗ combination of both the housing and its

56:49 ↗ services component and so that's where

56:52 ↗ that will be explored more but this

56:53 ↗ isn't something that's new to the city

56:55 ↗ and as a little move been pointed out

56:59 ↗ she's been involved with efforts locally

57:01 ↗ you have done something the community

57:04 ↗ has done some things in response in the

57:05 ↗ past to homelessness and then the

57:08 ↗ strategy about funding the city has been

57:11 ↗ funding affordable housing for years and

57:13 ↗ they have supported a wide range of

57:16 ↗ homeless housing through their funding

57:18 ↗ programs it has changed and evolved over

57:21 ↗ time and we continue to work on that a

57:23 ↗ number of the Reese I'd say we're to a

57:26 ↗ point that almost 20% of the resources

57:29 ↗ spent by the cities on affordable

57:31 ↗ housing are spent on housing

57:33 ↗ specifically targeted to homeless

57:35 ↗ households be it individuals

57:37 ↗ we're families it's and it changes over

57:40 ↗ time based on the work of human service

57:41 ↗ agencies and local agencies so the

57:44 ↗ homeless issue has one that's been

57:46 ↗ getting a lot of attention especially

57:47 ↗ the last 10 years and the city's

57:49 ↗ basically for in housing have been using

57:52 ↗ their housing funds so a number of the

57:54 ↗ developments in your community that have

57:56 ↗ been supported with affordable housing

57:58 ↗ dollars include housing units

58:01 ↗ specifically for housing households who

58:03 ↗ were formerly homeless the city did make

58:05 ↗ a piece of land one of the other

58:07 ↗ strategies is about surplus land the

58:10 ↗ city did work with what's their name

58:13 ↗ the local group compassion house to help

58:16 ↗ them they the city donated a house and

58:18 ↗ they moved it over to a property that

58:20 ↗ was donated to them and so that's a

58:22 ↗ local organization many of the new

58:25 ↗ larger developments the YWCA family

58:27 ↗ village some of those units are targeted

58:30 ↗ for households who were formerly

58:31 ↗ homeless so there are a wide range of

58:34 ↗ ways and strategies that homelessness

58:36 ↗ has been addressed on the capital side

58:38 ↗ as well as on the services side and so

58:40 ↗ those three different strategies though

58:42 ↗ are places in which the homeless issue

58:44 ↗ will has been touched in the past and we

58:47 ↗ assume will continue to be touched as

58:48 ↗ you go forward I think that's what

58:50 ↗ upsets me is because we see that that

58:53 ↗ has not actually made the impact that we

58:55 ↗ need in our community and so I would

58:57 ↗ have liked to have while I appreciate it

59:00 ↗ being called out by I assumed it was

59:01 ↗ gonna be called out it's something we've

59:02 ↗ discussed quite a bit I wish there was

59:05 ↗ something slightly more concrete whether

59:06 ↗ that's we're working with these

59:08 ↗ particular organizations of which there

59:11 ↗ are many in Seattle something that is a

59:13 ↗ little bit more concrete of saying these

59:14 ↗ this is the progress of where we're

59:16 ↗ moving right now

59:17 ↗ for some of these issues it feels a

59:19 ↗ little bit open and vague to me and

59:20 ↗ while I realize we have this time frame

59:22 ↗ of looking at it specifically regarding

59:25 ↗ strategy number nine I really think that

59:27 ↗ there could be something that's a little

59:28 ↗ a little more concrete about how where

59:31 ↗ the city would like to move forward to

59:33 ↗ doing a better job so if I could respond

59:36 ↗ to that as with the other strategies

59:38 ↗ where we're saying at this point until

59:40 ↗ you get in depth in each strategy it's

59:42 ↗ can be challenging to do that I think

59:46 ↗ one of the things we can potentially do

59:48 ↗ and

59:49 ↗ and maybe you know I want to try to test

59:50 ↗ this with you is homelessness is being

59:53 ↗ addressed on a more regional level now

59:55 ↗ it doesn't mean local actions aren't

59:57 ↗ happening but the resources are trying

59:59 ↗ to coordinate so that there's an overall

1:00:01 ↗ system that is trying to be more

1:00:03 ↗ effective so there's different

1:00:05 ↗ approaches to homelessness and they were

1:00:07 ↗ used five to ten years ago some of the

1:00:10 ↗ buildings we used to have were called

1:00:11 ↗ transitional housing they've been

1:00:13 ↗ converted to permanent housing for

1:00:15 ↗ homeless we're doing things called rapid

1:00:18 ↗ rehousing and it's being done through a

1:00:20 ↗ collective effort in which city staffs

1:00:23 ↗ and electeds are involved agencies are

1:00:25 ↗ involved and maybe something that could

1:00:28 ↗ be acknowledged here is in the report

1:00:32 ↗ here given the you know this is sort of

1:00:33 ↗ the first cut level is that homelessness

1:00:36 ↗ you know we will look hard at the

1:00:38 ↗ efforts being coordinated through all

1:00:40 ↗ home at the county level to help shape

1:00:42 ↗ local policies and moving forward to

1:00:44 ↗ increase our efforts maybe something

1:00:45 ↗ like that I would appreciate that okay

1:00:49 ↗ one of the reasons one of the ways that

1:00:51 ↗ the affordable housing is being funded

1:00:54 ↗ is through a light charge that everybody

1:00:57 ↗ pays when you sell a house when you

1:01:02 ↗ record a deed there was a small fee that

1:01:05 ↗ that goes along to that so there are

1:01:07 ↗ many avenues that that are is bringing

1:01:10 ↗ money in for affordable housing not for

1:01:13 ↗ homelessness but affordable housing I do

1:01:15 ↗ want to to just kind of say something

1:01:19 ↗ about a to use when you're in a city

1:01:22 ↗ like Bellevue which spread out and

1:01:26 ↗ doesn't have a area that they have to

1:01:30 ↗ contain all of their development in or

1:01:34 ↗ Bellevue Kirkland area where there's

1:01:36 ↗ areas where there's big lots where you

1:01:38 ↗ can build on ad use we're kind of we're

1:01:43 ↗ looking at this same central area and

1:01:46 ↗ there are very small lots and they're

1:01:48 ↗ Ramblers and to try to to make them into

1:01:52 ↗ a bu units you're gonna have to build on

1:01:55 ↗ to them and I don't know how many and be

1:01:59 ↗ supported in

1:02:00 ↗ in the downtown area it would be nice if

1:02:03 ↗ it was a lot more land and associated

1:02:07 ↗ with this but it's not and I certainly

1:02:09 ↗ don't think that it's really fair to

1:02:12 ↗ raise taxes on anybody everybody in

1:02:14 ↗ order to do support affordable housing

1:02:19 ↗ we need to find a way to do that is

1:02:21 ↗ there anything else that it's good for

1:02:23 ↗ the order and just a quick thing it's

1:02:25 ↗ more of a statement than anything I

1:02:29 ↗ appreciate the comments about the

1:02:31 ↗ moratorium coming to an end and we're

1:02:33 ↗ gonna work on this for you know the next

1:02:35 ↗ two years and meanwhile you know permits

1:02:38 ↗ can start coming in and so can I think

1:02:41 ↗ the question is kind of we kind of like

1:02:42 ↗ walk and chew gum at the same time you

1:02:44 ↗ know so maybe I would just ask and I'm

1:02:46 ↗ not really sure if there's flexibility

1:02:49 ↗ to do this because you know staff time

1:02:51 ↗ and everything but maybe we just sort of

1:02:53 ↗ if we can make a not even a

1:02:55 ↗ recommendation to council be just took

1:02:56 ↗ sort of a commitment that if we could

1:02:58 ↗ prioritize in the strategies that we

1:03:01 ↗ look at first you know those that are

1:03:03 ↗ going to influence what's coming and

1:03:06 ↗ after the moratorium is lifted in other

1:03:08 ↗ words it seems like so I'm thinking like

1:03:10 ↗ for you know four six seven and eight

1:03:11 ↗ are the kind of things that could

1:03:13 ↗ influence the kinds of things that are

1:03:14 ↗ built whereas the others are more about

1:03:17 ↗ retention of character and things which

1:03:19 ↗ are all important but I guess that's

1:03:22 ↗ just sort of a statement or maybe a

1:03:23 ↗ consideration for staff as we prioritize

1:03:26 ↗ these over the next two years like oh

1:03:28 ↗ that nutrition seems like the staff kind

1:03:30 ↗ of has a rough idea of the order in

1:03:32 ↗ which you want to tackle these and what

1:03:34 ↗ needs to be done before the moratorium

1:03:35 ↗ Rises after it did you something as you

1:03:37 ↗ as you talked through it so maybe I

1:03:38 ↗ think since I think the one through nine

1:03:40 ↗ is currently arbitrary it might might be

1:03:44 ↗ helpful to maybe sort those

1:03:45 ↗ chronologically not necessarily saying

1:03:48 ↗ number ones most important but that

1:03:49 ↗ might be the one that just from a

1:03:52 ↗ tactical standpoint will be tackling

1:03:53 ↗ first I don't I don't know I don't know

1:03:57 ↗ that would be helpful because when you

1:03:58 ↗ read it you kind of just assume one is

1:04:00 ↗ either is first right certainly

1:04:03 ↗ recommend which order to do them but

1:04:05 ↗ with staff resources we really we only

1:04:07 ↗ know that first two that are out of the

1:04:09 ↗ Gate this year maybe so maybe that just

1:04:12 ↗ means then I'm suggesting those becomes

1:04:14 ↗ one and two just to make that more clear

1:04:16 ↗ that's what we're going to tackle first

1:04:17 ↗ and maybe if the difference between five

1:04:19 ↗ and eight

1:04:20 ↗ there is no difference and that's fine

1:04:21 ↗ but made me just pull off those two I

1:04:23 ↗ think it's helpful because when you're

1:04:25 ↗ looking at a numbered 1 through 9 mm-hmm

1:04:27 ↗ it's just helpful to be ok 1 and 2

1:04:29 ↗ that's what we're gonna be tackling

1:04:31 ↗ first out of the gate I think them I

1:04:32 ↗ think that might be helpful okay I think

1:04:36 ↗ it's really important to do the codes

1:04:38 ↗ yeah I mean that's how we got into

1:04:40 ↗ trouble with some of the buildings that

1:04:42 ↗ did go up with because we didn't have a

1:04:44 ↗ code that said no you can't do that

1:04:46 ↗ so I'm afraid that 2 years time there's

1:04:50 ↗ going to be a lot that happens that is

1:04:53 ↗ going to take away from the character of

1:04:55 ↗ our of our city so one more

1:05:06 ↗ - I think to your to your comments that

1:05:10 ↗ these are the affordable housing

1:05:12 ↗ strategies you're looking at and the two

1:05:15 ↗ that have been identified that are most

1:05:17 ↗ linked to the moratorium are the ones

1:05:19 ↗ that are in the cent you know are the

1:05:20 ↗ zoning and the incentives and as well as

1:05:23 ↗ the Tod project because those are most

1:05:25 ↗ related that once you lift that's it

1:05:26 ↗ will then affect the development I you

1:05:29 ↗ can speak to this better than I can

1:05:30 ↗ there's several other things related to

1:05:32 ↗ codes for the central ASIC law that are

1:05:35 ↗ also being worked on now that will be

1:05:38 ↗ part of getting done as part of the

1:05:41 ↗ moratorium correct I would correct you

1:05:44 ↗ though correct us and say the nine are

1:05:46 ↗ the whole Housing Strategy not just

1:05:49 ↗ affordable right there's a whole Housing

1:05:50 ↗ Strategy the two that are going through

1:05:52 ↗ first are are two of the affordable ones

1:05:55 ↗ though right that are most related but

1:05:57 ↗ there's other actions that the council

1:05:59 ↗ has requested be completed as part of

1:06:02 ↗ the moratorium outside the housing that

1:06:04 ↗ these nine things that you see here

1:06:05 ↗ right working on most of them Bert

1:06:07 ↗ familiar with the architectural and

1:06:11 ↗ urban design which your public hearing

1:06:13 ↗ is on next week parking you already

1:06:15 ↗ finished her ah I'm missing somebody

1:06:19 ↗ isn't it their vertical the mixed-use

1:06:21 ↗ right that was the first one all of

1:06:23 ↗ those issues go into it I'm still right

1:06:26 ↗ I'm still concerned the vision that's

1:06:28 ↗ codes are not there to prohibit some

1:06:32 ↗ things that maybe we as a community

1:06:33 ↗ don't want in our community right I

1:06:36 ↗ agree I found one of the most

1:06:38 ↗ interesting things about this process so

1:06:39 ↗ far to me was poring over the raw census

1:06:41 ↗ data I love being able to actually see

1:06:43 ↗ how our community is changing I think

1:06:45 ↗ it's easy to think of Issaquah and older

1:06:48 ↗ terms and I like looking at seeing how

1:06:51 ↗ you know thirty percent of our

1:06:53 ↗ population and single individuals and

1:06:55 ↗ yet we have a huge glut of big

1:06:58 ↗ stand-alone multi bedroom housing in our

1:07:00 ↗ community and so it concerns me that the

1:07:04 ↗ moratorium is going to be lifted prior

1:07:06 ↗ to trying to put in these safeguards to

1:07:10 ↗ say no we're not getting the housing

1:07:12 ↗ that we wanted and yet we don't have

1:07:14 ↗ something in place to be able to ensure

1:07:15 ↗ that

1:07:16 ↗ and specifically regarding the types of

1:07:19 ↗ Units that we're going to be getting

1:07:21 ↗ so our concerns about kind of how this

1:07:24 ↗ is getting laid out and while I don't

1:07:26 ↗ expect us to have answers today and so

1:07:30 ↗ immediately I do want to see more of a

1:07:33 ↗ correlation between how are we trying to

1:07:35 ↗ actually get what we want right now we

1:07:36 ↗ have a great document about guiding

1:07:38 ↗ principles but actually that next step

1:07:41 ↗ of getting to the code amendments I

1:07:43 ↗ think are really critical right now that

1:07:50 ↗ sounds like and this is Ross here the

1:07:56 ↗ next step that we should probably think

1:07:58 ↗ about doing the recommendations these

1:08:02 ↗ strategies these nine strategies don't

1:08:07 ↗ get baked out so much faith but we

1:08:11 ↗ actually address we put resources we put

1:08:17 ↗ resources towards actually getting these

1:08:19 ↗ things knocked out in time for the

1:08:22 ↗ moratorium to before it's lifted no I

1:08:28 ↗ think we need to work with them and all

1:08:31 ↗ do deliberate speed and I think there's

1:08:33 ↗ some that are very specifically the one

1:08:35 ↗ that's very moratorium dependent that's

1:08:37 ↗ the developer developer incentives I

1:08:40 ↗ don't think we want to link this with

1:08:43 ↗ the moratorium I think we need to be

1:08:44 ↗ working on both of these as fast as as

1:08:46 ↗ as the volunteers and staff can I don't

1:08:49 ↗ think formally linking them is is

1:08:51 ↗ necessary would accomplish anything I

1:08:52 ↗ actually think there's requirements

1:08:56 ↗ that are being imposed on the council in

1:08:58 ↗ the way of county or state where you

1:09:01 ↗ have to do certain things in certain

1:09:03 ↗ orders and only have certain times to do

1:09:05 ↗ a moratorium so I think that that's one

1:09:07 ↗ of the things they're coming up at and

1:09:10 ↗ so I would love to see a moratorium

1:09:13 ↗ continue but I don't think that the

1:09:15 ↗ council has the authority based on all

1:09:18 ↗ these other things in order to do that

1:09:20 ↗ right they already made their Verity

1:09:23 ↗ said that it will be lifted the end of

1:09:25 ↗ December they already loaded on that

1:09:28 ↗ what I think in the in the spirit of

1:09:32 ↗ helping everyone move forward I think

1:09:34 ↗ should we move to recommend the nine

1:09:36 ↗ strategies as they as they stand I have

1:09:39 ↗ one quick question for Trish how many

1:09:41 ↗ languages is this document available in

1:09:42 ↗ right now on on the city website how

1:09:45 ↗ many languages is this document

1:09:46 ↗ available on the city website right now

1:09:48 ↗ is it solely in English right now yeah

1:09:51 ↗ this time I purview but I think our

1:09:53 ↗ website I don't know that our website

1:09:55 ↗ translates things yet okay that'd be a

1:09:57 ↗ good question though something that we

1:09:59 ↗ discussed in our work sessions was

1:10:02 ↗ talking about how to kind of really

1:10:04 ↗ bring the community together and have as

1:10:05 ↗ much outreach as possible and so while

1:10:09 ↗ affordable housing isn't necessarily the

1:10:13 ↗ the venue to be talking about how we

1:10:15 ↗ come together as a community

1:10:16 ↗ I would encourage city staff to see

1:10:18 ↗ about how we can arrange resources to

1:10:20 ↗ make this progression with the city more

1:10:23 ↗ available to all residents within our

1:10:24 ↗ community

1:10:31 ↗ okay AJ what were you gonna do I guess

1:10:34 ↗ can I move to have the Commission

1:10:37 ↗ recommend that these nine that we

1:10:39 ↗ endorse these nine tragedies and that

1:10:41 ↗ they should go to Council I have a

1:10:43 ↗ second look at all those in favor say

1:10:46 ↗ aye aye and so is that in the hole the

1:10:51 ↗ hole straight at the hole okay

1:10:53 ↗ hoping this is the way it is okay so you

1:10:56 ↗ didn't want to prioritize them or yeah

1:10:59 ↗ okay I don't know I think from a

1:11:02 ↗ presentation standpoint it would be

1:11:03 ↗ helpful but that was more of a

1:11:04 ↗ suggestion rather than like a formal

1:11:06 ↗ recommendation okay you know at least

1:11:09 ↗ some of our thoughts that what things

1:11:11 ↗ are most important but it also depends

1:11:14 ↗ on what the city has the facilities and

1:11:16 ↗ right the band wins to to be able to

1:11:19 ↗ address in what order they they're going

1:11:21 ↗ to come in so we understand that and so

1:11:24 ↗ we just I'm just hoping that things like

1:11:27 ↗ code amendments and you know the basics

1:11:29 ↗ I'm in there before you start planning

1:11:32 ↗ everything else because you can't you

1:11:35 ↗ can make all these plans and if the

1:11:36 ↗ codes aren't in in in place then anybody

1:11:39 ↗ can come in and do whatever they want

1:11:41 ↗ even though you want to go this way

1:11:42 ↗ they're going to go this way so you know

1:11:46 ↗ that that's just I think we've talked

1:11:49 ↗ about it oh yeah so at this point I feel

1:11:51 ↗ like we've tried to communicate to staff

1:11:53 ↗ how we feel about but what we're looking

1:11:56 ↗ at right now is a little bit limited

1:11:57 ↗ it's hard to be like yep all done leave

1:12:00 ↗ it to you and so so this is trying in

1:12:02 ↗ the spirit of saying that this is you

1:12:04 ↗ know forward momentum we want to not

1:12:08 ↗ necessarily tie your hands as saying

1:12:10 ↗ this is where we feel is the most

1:12:12 ↗ important way to allocate resources I

1:12:14 ↗ think you guys know that better but

1:12:15 ↗ while still I think we've communicated

1:12:16 ↗ to you tonight that this is a start and

1:12:20 ↗ we need to keep that momentum going okay

1:12:22 ↗ but it sounds like you agreed with AJ to

1:12:24 ↗ at least change the numbers on though to

1:12:26 ↗ that word trying to get done now it was

1:12:29 ↗ that orientation standpoint you've

1:12:34 ↗ already you've already clarified what

1:12:36 ↗ what those two things are that you're

1:12:37 ↗ initially working on right eight years

1:12:40 ↗ so that's

1:12:41 ↗ yeah that's sorbate we're basing that

1:12:42 ↗ off what you've told us rather than what

1:12:43 ↗ we see it's a priority okay

1:12:45 ↗ the carthesian yeah that's fair I'm

1:12:48 ↗ worried about the amount of time that

1:12:49 ↗ you're saying that this is going to take

1:12:51 ↗ to actually implement we got 12 years

1:12:54 ↗ yeah well yeah see we've got

1:12:57 ↗ developments going in now and as the

1:13:00 ↗ moratorium meet every week those are

1:13:05 ↗ going to be not applicable to this

1:13:08 ↗ document and this document it's actually

1:13:10 ↗ really important mm-hmm

1:13:12 ↗ what can we do to accelerate that

1:13:15 ↗ process give you more resources to get

1:13:17 ↗ this type of thing done you could get

1:13:20 ↗ involved in the budget process make a

1:13:22 ↗ recommendation that these be funded in

1:13:25 ↗ the next two years or something to you

1:13:28 ↗ know that there's enough resources to do

1:13:29 ↗ the work that's that's laid out about if

1:13:34 ↗ we mi make a recommendation to Council

1:13:37 ↗ just saying that we as a committee

1:13:41 ↗ consider this extremely important and

1:13:44 ↗ would like the council to consider doing

1:13:48 ↗ extra man-hours to accomplish what we

1:13:53 ↗ think is important for the future of

1:13:56 ↗ that community all ii bet yes and i

1:14:03 ↗ don't you know it doesn't have to be a

1:14:05 ↗ formal letter but i'm assuming that

1:14:06 ↗ Trish when she presents this - yeah she

1:14:10 ↗ adds this to the presentation great like

1:14:15 ↗ someone had mentioned once you build it

1:14:17 ↗ it's there it's gone it's there yeah

1:14:21 ↗ great okay sure

1:14:26 ↗ do you think we're helping Trish with

1:14:32 ↗ the work on this I just wanted to sort

1:14:34 ↗ of clarify a point or two from what I

1:14:35 ↗ just heard so we can make sure we get it

1:14:37 ↗ so what I think I've heard is you've had

1:14:40 ↗ a lot of comments and we will in the

1:14:42 ↗ staff memo to counsel try to incorporate

1:14:44 ↗ in his comments if not part of the

1:14:46 ↗ formal motion some of things you've said

1:14:48 ↗ tonight and one of the things I thought

1:14:50 ↗ I was hearing you just say in different

1:14:54 ↗ ways I just wanna make sure if we're

1:14:56 ↗ hearing this right is that some of the

1:14:58 ↗ strategies are code linked to code and

1:15:01 ↗ that if you were to have your druthers

1:15:03 ↗ in trying to sort of help filter the

1:15:06 ↗ code the ones that relate the code might

1:15:08 ↗ be the ones that are most important of

1:15:10 ↗ the nine to work on sooner than later

1:15:12 ↗ because the code is the core of what

1:15:16 ↗ cities do and how they manage what

1:15:18 ↗ happens and any more specifically we're

1:15:20 ↗ currently changing the code that's part

1:15:22 ↗ of other moratorium right work streams

1:15:24 ↗ and so it makes sense to do that

1:15:26 ↗ concurrently but some of the strategies

1:15:28 ↗ are clinic have code some of them are

1:15:33 ↗ money which is not code some of them's

1:15:36 ↗ encouraging state legislation which is

1:15:38 ↗ not city code so that's kind of where

1:15:41 ↗ I'm saying I'm trying to see if I'm

1:15:43 ↗ hearing that part is one thing to

1:15:45 ↗ consider is when they're looking at that

1:15:47 ↗ full list if it's code related and those

1:15:50 ↗ are the ones that often need the most

1:15:51 ↗ community conversation to to get through

1:15:53 ↗ because whatever opinion or is here

1:15:55 ↗ there's probably another opinion there

1:15:56 ↗ that everybody has to sort through and

1:15:58 ↗ you you guys will be helping do that but

1:16:01 ↗ I think that's what I wanted to see if I

1:16:03 ↗ was hearing correctly is the ones that

1:16:05 ↗ have code related items think hard about

1:16:08 ↗ trying to get going sooner than later

1:16:09 ↗ and I think and if and if this requires

1:16:13 ↗ a lot of work than don't worry abut but

1:16:15 ↗ I think what would might be helpful is

1:16:16 ↗ to have a little table that takes all

1:16:20 ↗ the the recommended policies you don't

1:16:23 ↗ need to restate them but yep 3 1 3 2 3 3

1:16:25 ↗ or whatever and then be like does this

1:16:28 ↗ require change the code and then just

1:16:31 ↗ like a yes/no just to help identify

1:16:34 ↗ which ones are codependent which ones

1:16:36 ↗ are not right just help just open

1:16:39 ↗ beginning right and some of them we

1:16:41 ↗ don't know until we actually dig in to

1:16:43 ↗ see what how to change it is if it's a

1:16:46 ↗ code or not okay so so well yeah so it

1:16:48 ↗ kind of can be like yes no maybe we just

1:16:53 ↗ want it done

1:16:54 ↗ I know okay that's yeah no that's that's

1:16:57 ↗ why I phrased it that way if that if

1:16:59 ↗ that to figure that out would actually

1:17:01 ↗ be doing the deep dive on the issue then

1:17:04 ↗ I mentioned code amendments or some of

1:17:07 ↗ them mentioned more specifically so

1:17:09 ↗ those would be you know obvious like ad

1:17:11 ↗ use but there's no inclusion area but

1:17:13 ↗ some of them like condominium I don't

1:17:16 ↗ know how that would turn out if we were

1:17:17 ↗ able to get the state legislature I

1:17:19 ↗ don't know if we'd have to change the

1:17:21 ↗ code yeah that's a really good point

1:17:27 ↗ okay

1:17:28 ↗ no I'll retract that suggest I think

1:17:30 ↗ well I think what we'll learn that as we

1:17:31 ↗ as we as we dive deep in each one of

1:17:34 ↗ these it'll be a lot of discussion on

1:17:36 ↗ okay actually as you said that what we

1:17:39 ↗ have done for some cities is we will

1:17:42 ↗ have something that will have like two

1:17:44 ↗ or three column two or three columns and

1:17:46 ↗ it'll say if its fiscal regulatory or

1:17:51 ↗ communications or community outreach I

1:17:53 ↗ and I may be checking more than one box

1:17:56 ↗ for some of the strategies and we maybe

1:17:58 ↗ could do something like that here III

1:18:00 ↗ think that would be great I think

1:18:02 ↗ helping us understand what the like

1:18:04 ↗ because you could see what you've done

1:18:06 ↗ with with the sub-bullets as you've have

1:18:09 ↗ a bunch as is a bunch of proposed

1:18:12 ↗ levers to pull and then try and then

1:18:14 ↗ classify in those levers is it a fiscal

1:18:16 ↗ lover is it a is it or is it is it a

1:18:18 ↗ code lovers the combination of the two I

1:18:20 ↗ think that would be that would just help

1:18:21 ↗ people just navigated a little bit

1:18:23 ↗ easier and I think also going out for

1:18:26 ↗ the smaller faster actionable items

1:18:29 ↗ maybe concurrently to one big task that

1:18:33 ↗ we have to deal with on this that might

1:18:35 ↗ take a lot of time they just start

1:18:37 ↗ knocking out things that are easy and

1:18:39 ↗ fast and we're staffed to be able to do

1:18:42 ↗ work on with current resources while

1:18:44 ↗ we're and you get other additional

1:18:46 ↗ resources right we've started some of

1:18:48 ↗ the Adu piece just because we know that

1:18:50 ↗ code and we know where some of the

1:18:52 ↗ problems are so we've started that one I

1:18:54 ↗ don't know when it will come but we've

1:18:56 ↗ started that one already

1:18:58 ↗ no but yeah because that's an easier one

1:19:01 ↗ because we know sort of what we're doing

1:19:02 ↗ on that we just don't quite even know

1:19:07 ↗ how to dive in because they're pretty

1:19:09 ↗ big now you get maybe five or six small

1:19:11 ↗ things done and while you're still

1:19:13 ↗ working on one big concurrent project

1:19:15 ↗ very optimistic that's how the counsel

1:19:19 ↗ that you need more people to help you do

1:19:22 ↗ this with that what is our next meeting

1:19:27 ↗ what's in the next week a week from

1:19:29 ↗ today two public hearings one is on

1:19:32 ↗ architectural review and urban design

1:19:35 ↗ manual that is a tool that the

1:19:38 ↗ Development Commission uses would be

1:19:41 ↗ using for development review in central

1:19:44 ↗ Issaquah they've been having meetings so

1:19:47 ↗ that the whatever it is that comes to

1:19:49 ↗ you all is what the Development

1:19:51 ↗ Commission feels they need to do a

1:19:53 ↗ better job in reviewing projects in

1:19:55 ↗ central Issaquah so that's next week if

1:19:58 ↗ that I ppthey meeting public hearing yes

1:20:00 ↗ just and we're gonna get feedback I

1:20:03 ↗ believe the packet is being worked on as

1:20:05 ↗ we speak by magic even though I'm

1:20:07 ↗ sitting here it will have a memo coming

1:20:12 ↗ from the development Commission letting

1:20:13 ↗ you know how they've review at least

1:20:15 ↗ that's what I'm being told us how

1:20:16 ↗ they've reviewed the draft as its moved

1:20:18 ↗ through how they use it how they feel it

1:20:21 ↗ will help them do a better job at

1:20:24 ↗ reviewing future projects coming through

1:20:26 ↗ through central and the other public

1:20:29 ↗ hearing that's the first one the define

1:20:32 ↗ that can you can you can I ask that that

1:20:35 ↗ little memo also briefly explain like

1:20:38 ↗ what the triggers are packet is going

1:20:42 ↗ out like in moments we're working on it

1:20:45 ↗ back at the office where I will be

1:20:46 ↗ heading directly okay this I think

1:20:49 ↗ they've already sent it to us we're just

1:20:50 ↗ madly packaging it as I sit here and

1:20:53 ↗ they sit back there they're probably

1:20:55 ↗ going get out of there Trish but I said

1:20:57 ↗ no I'm gonna stick it out but the other

1:20:59 ↗ one which I think you guys are going to

1:21:01 ↗ love the other public hearing is

1:21:03 ↗ another one an urban schools and this

1:21:06 ↗ one from your work with parking and your

1:21:08 ↗ work with some of the other moratorium

1:21:10 ↗ items we realized as urban schools went

1:21:13 ↗ forward I'm sorry that it would make

1:21:16 ↗ sense that if we're requiring structured

1:21:19 ↗ parking for some of the required parking

1:21:20 ↗ for offices and residential why wouldn't

1:21:24 ↗ we require that for a part of the

1:21:26 ↗ required parking first schools because

1:21:29 ↗ that would just help to not have big

1:21:31 ↗ surface parking lots so that one's

1:21:33 ↗ coming back to you with just that little

1:21:35 ↗ part not the whole urban schools amun

1:21:37 ↗ what day next Thursday as well there's

1:21:41 ↗ one meeting next thursday and then the

1:21:43 ↗ following meeting is well there's two

1:21:46 ↗ hearings at one meeting there's two

1:21:47 ↗ hearings in one meeting okay

1:21:50 ↗ the next meeting after that is September

1:21:54 ↗ 14th which is your annual comp plan

1:21:58 ↗ public hearing on the 2017 pound fine

1:22:01 ↗ amendments okay there aren't that many

1:22:04 ↗ this year which is good for the public

1:22:07 ↗ hearing because we've been busy with so

1:22:09 ↗ many other things there's very few comp

1:22:10 ↗ plan amendments okay that that list is

1:22:13 ↗ in the packet right you guys know we got

1:22:18 ↗ it okay right and I can't remember how

1:22:21 ↗ many of you have RSVP'd for next week

1:22:23 ↗ but all right no I that's not the one

1:22:26 ↗ that you're missing you're missing the

1:22:27 ↗ big trifecta one the end of September

1:22:32 ↗ the end of September right I'll be here

1:22:35 ↗ you're gonna be here for the trifecta oh

1:22:37 ↗ good because that's a huge one on the

1:22:40 ↗ 28th okay that's next week

1:22:43 ↗ no September 28 28 okay I thought that

1:22:46 ↗ was you had already stated everything I

1:22:48 ↗ know this has been the craziest year

1:22:50 ↗ I've ever had with the BC one okay so

1:22:52 ↗ without any other input I'm going to

1:22:56 ↗ call the meeting when end at 7:59 Wow oh

1:23:01 ↗ good work you are

1:23:13 ↗ you

Approved minutes

The minutes PDF below is the canonical record. Structured parsing of attendance and motions for this body's minutes format is not yet implemented — open the PDF for the full content.

Open PDF