Planning Policy Commission · Thursday, November 9, 2017 · City Council Digest

1. CALL TO ORDER

Commission Membership

packet pp.3

Previously discussed: Planning Policy Commission · Sep 28, 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 October 26, 2017

packet pp.5–9

Previously discussed: Planning Policy Commission · Sep 28, 2017

▶ Watch from 1:31 Open packet at p.5 ↗

Staff report:

CITY OF ISSAQUAH PLANNING POLICY COMMISSION MINUTES

3. AGENDA ITEMS

Public Hearing: Proposed Amendments to Central Issaquah Plan District Visions, (R)

Trish Heinonen, Policy Planning Manager Jennifer R. Woods, Associate Planner · packet pp.11–24

Topics: Land Use

Open packet at p.11 ↗

Staff report:

CENTRAL ISSAQUAH DISTRICT VISIONS

3705 segments .txt ↗

0:12 ↗ because you're not used to sitting down

0:14 ↗ here in the dinner table CD you have to

0:20 ↗ hit your microphones gently to make the

0:23 ↗ red light go on okay John take it away

0:29 ↗ welcome to the November 9th meeting in

0:32 ↗ the Planning Policy Commission tonight

0:34 ↗ we're going to talk about the the vision

0:36 ↗ of in support of what we wanted to look

0:39 ↗ like in the future and you might notice

0:42 ↗ that there are several additional people

0:44 ↗ around this table and they are part of

0:47 ↗ the task force that originally spent two

0:50 ↗ or three years many hours putting

0:53 ↗ together what we all think has positive

0:59 ↗ positives for the city so we're not here

1:02 ↗ to change it we're just here to see if

1:05 ↗ we have to make any updates or based on

1:09 ↗ what has happened in the last two years

1:11 ↗ so we are not here to tell you people

1:15 ↗ that you did not do a good job and to

1:17 ↗ start all over we certainly do not want

1:19 ↗ to start all over so that's what we're

1:22 ↗ planning to do tonight the first thing

1:25 ↗ on our agenda is always the approval of

1:28 ↗ the minutes so do I have a I like to

1:31 ↗ make a motion to approve the minutes

1:32 ↗ from October 26 any discussion any

1:37 ↗ changes all those in favor say aye

1:41 ↗ with that we will go right into Trish's

1:44 ↗ presentation of what we should be

1:47 ↗ looking at and what our plans are for

1:50 ↗ the future okay do we since there's so

1:53 ↗ many new PPC members would it be helpful

1:55 ↗ for our Rockstar task force members to

1:58 ↗ introduce themselves because I sure am

2:00 ↗ really going both ways I don't think

2:03 ↗ that everybody on PPC knows these

2:05 ↗ gentlemen right well that's what I I

2:07 ↗ thought so that everyone could know who

2:09 ↗ to whom they are talking with because

2:10 ↗ and we can start with can yeah gently

2:15 ↗ tap

2:15 ↗ in Koenig's mark I've lived in this cost

2:18 ↗ since 1984 when it was a one-stop white

2:21 ↗ town that Front and sunset so lots of

2:23 ↗ changes been involved in a lot of the

2:26 ↗ activities related to growth management

2:29 ↗ and the developments including Asuka

2:31 ↗ Highlands and talus particularly I'm on

2:35 ↗ the board of these coops trails Club and

2:36 ↗ the mountains to sound Greenway and

2:38 ↗ several others so I come from an

2:40 ↗ environmental and conservation bent I'm

2:44 ↗ Mel Morgan I've served on the

2:46 ↗ Development Commission for a couple of

2:47 ↗ decades and then served on the central a

2:50 ↗ task force as well I'm Joe Forkner I was

2:53 ↗ the chair of the task force and done

2:56 ↗ pretty much everything there is to do in

2:58 ↗ Issaquah some level or another yes

3:05 ↗ microphone you need to share this is my

3:10 ↗ first year on BBC I'm Ron Paul and I'm

3:14 ↗ the vice chair on PBZ I'm John purple

3:18 ↗ and I have that pleasure of serving as

3:19 ↗ chair this year

3:23 ↗ Haeju Magali I'm an alternate for PPC

3:25 ↗ moved here just last year lived in

3:29 ↗ Bellevue very very briefly before that

3:31 ↗ perform living here from out of state

3:33 ↗ and I'm Mary Lynch and I also was part

3:36 ↗ of its citizens Task Force and lived

3:39 ↗ here over 30 years Mathieu Saldana and I

3:43 ↗ have lived in Issaquah for 10 years and

3:46 ↗ I'm an alternate on PPC Abbe John Staub

3:50 ↗ I've been on PPC for two years now and

3:53 ↗ lived in Issaquah for the same amount of

3:55 ↗ time so great

3:57 ↗ Karl sweat burger and I've been on PPC

3:59 ↗ for 16 years

4:03 ↗ Wow great thank you all and I noticed we

4:06 ↗ have John from The Grange here who was

4:08 ↗ in one of our focus groups many focus

4:10 ↗ groups that we had for property owners

4:13 ↗ and businesses in the central area and

4:15 ↗ also we had open houses to open houses

4:18 ↗ to get the more public flavor as well so

4:21 ↗ thanks John for being here tonight

4:22 ↗ so in your packet I we briefly describe

4:26 ↗ sort of how we wanted to go through

4:28 ↗ things

4:28 ↗ and it's a little different perhaps than

4:31 ↗ we've done some of our moratorium

4:33 ↗ projects in the past this past year

4:35 ↗ because it has been a busy one we took

4:38 ↗ we had as I said we had some great oh we

4:40 ↗ started with a great open house with you

4:42 ↗ all before the new members came on board

4:45 ↗ which is unfortunate but we wanted to

4:47 ↗ start as soon as we could and then we

4:49 ↗ took it to the business owners and

4:50 ↗ property owners and then we had some

4:52 ↗ focus groups out in the community one at

4:55 ↗ Atlas and one at the barn and so we took

4:58 ↗ all that public comment and the existing

5:00 ↗ visions and the new visions what we

5:01 ↗ thought of and some strategies and we

5:03 ↗ gave it to the council last month for

5:05 ↗ their informal review and it just wasn't

5:10 ↗ it just wasn't exactly what they what

5:13 ↗ they had wanted and so we thought we'd

5:15 ↗ take a step back with you all and give

5:18 ↗ you the existing conditions what's there

5:22 ↗ now take you on some tours because we

5:25 ↗ know some of you are real new and just

5:27 ↗ to sort of give you the flavor of what's

5:29 ↗ out there and then start building the

5:31 ↗ the new visions from the ground up again

5:34 ↗ because maybe that that would be a

5:36 ↗ better tact so the first part of tonight

5:39 ↗ we want to talk about the purpose of a

5:41 ↗ vision why do we even need visions for

5:43 ↗ long range for our areas and some of the

5:46 ↗ issues that central has faced since it's

5:49 ↗ been adopted and things that it will

5:51 ↗ face in the future to kind of get us all

5:53 ↗ geared up for why do we need a good

5:54 ↗ vision and then the second half of the

5:56 ↗ meeting we're hoping to actually start

5:58 ↗ to word to throw out some bigger ideas

6:01 ↗ for each of the visions to start

6:04 ↗ thinking about what the what the vision

6:06 ↗ of what the future will be I don't know

6:08 ↗ if we can get through all ten tonight

6:10 ↗ maybe not but then there's always the

6:13 ↗ November 30th meeting too that we can

6:15 ↗ continue our work and we're hoping that

6:16 ↗ some of the task force members can come

6:18 ↗ back that night as well if possible so

6:21 ↗ with that again this is the expectations

6:26 ↗ we're even going to try and keep the

6:27 ↗ first set of questions to an hour in the

6:29 ↗ second set for an hour and then hear

6:32 ↗ public comment so we're not here till

6:33 ↗ midnight because that those

6:36 ↗ never very fun movies meetings would be

6:39 ↗ good if it was a movie and the outcome

6:41 ↗ we hope is that we understand why we

6:43 ↗ need a vision that we understand what's

6:45 ↗ changed since adoption and how may be

6:48 ↗ better we can figure out how to react

6:50 ↗ now so that we're ready for the future

6:52 ↗ and then have clear direction on the

6:55 ↗ boundaries of the districts is 10 enough

6:58 ↗ is 10 too many does 10 make sense is

7:00 ↗ some of the questions that we heard so

7:03 ↗ why anyway why was it a moratorium item

7:06 ↗ for the council this was a big one is

7:10 ↗ there something missing that caused us

7:13 ↗ to get development that maybe we didn't

7:15 ↗ think we were going to get to fix that

7:17 ↗ do we need to add some more details do

7:20 ↗ we need to have more pictures do we need

7:22 ↗ to have maps with specific placeholders

7:26 ↗ for things what kinds of criteria can we

7:29 ↗ use to get a better vision that helps us

7:32 ↗ have a better set of standards to get us

7:35 ↗ where we want to go for the future and

7:37 ↗ the council when they set this as a

7:39 ↗ moratorium item they gave us some new

7:41 ↗ criteria to evaluate as well one is our

7:43 ↗ contextual style they wanted the green

7:45 ↗ necklace to actually be pulled out of

7:47 ↗ the environmental piece so it would

7:49 ↗ stand alone because they thought it was

7:51 ↗ that important that it should stand

7:52 ↗ alone and placemaking so that each of

7:55 ↗ the neighborhoods has its own place

7:57 ↗ where the public would gather there and

7:59 ↗ the neighbors and business people could

8:01 ↗ gather that would be their own unique

8:02 ↗ feature in the neighborhood and they

8:05 ↗ also thought we should check the

8:07 ↗ boundaries that maybe the boundaries

8:09 ↗ don't make sense the purpose of having a

8:14 ↗ vision it's - it's to be aspirational

8:17 ↗ it's to be exciting it's to be inspiring

8:21 ↗ it's to be possible

8:24 ↗ certainly there are visions that are

8:27 ↗ impossible we don't want those we want

8:29 ↗ them to be able to be to be implemented

8:32 ↗ we want them to anticipate the jobs and

8:36 ↗ housing balance to work for us and not

8:40 ↗ and not to harm our economics or harm

8:43 ↗ our our sense of place so visions

8:47 ↗ sometimes they're touchy-feely but if we

8:49 ↗ can get them right

8:50 ↗ you can monitor them you can measure

8:53 ↗ them to see if you're making a

8:55 ↗ successful if you're successful or not

8:57 ↗ and we have some ideas on that at the

8:59 ↗ end to how to make them more measurable

9:02 ↗ are there questions about why so what's

9:10 ↗ happened since 2013 since we adopted the

9:14 ↗ vision well the first thing was Atlas

9:16 ↗ happened just outside the urban core

9:18 ↗ they weren't required to have mixed Jews

9:21 ↗ they weren't required to have affordable

9:23 ↗ housing because they were right outside

9:25 ↗ in the line of the urban core so that

9:28 ↗ caused us to ponder maybe our

9:31 ↗ regulations didn't go far enough maybe

9:33 ↗ we should have had more requirements

9:35 ↗ that were more just central wide instead

9:39 ↗ of just the urban core so that was one

9:41 ↗ of the first developments gateway

9:43 ↗ happened it all went residential even

9:47 ↗ though we wanted mix juice we didn't

9:49 ↗ require mix juice and so residential was

9:53 ↗ the hot market residential is what we

9:55 ↗ got the Costco development agreement

9:58 ↗ came in we think that was a good thing

10:00 ↗ there it's a known quantity of what

10:03 ↗ we're going to get in that area over the

10:05 ↗ next 20 to 25 years we annexed the State

10:08 ↗ Park that's a really good thing we have

10:11 ↗ two new hotels

10:12 ↗ we're in Sound Transit 3 so there's

10:15 ↗ light rail approved for Issaquah that's

10:18 ↗ pretty exciting the metro connects is

10:21 ↗ adapted that's all the new regional bus

10:23 ↗ routes that many of them come to

10:25 ↗ Issaquah there's a new 62nd Street

10:28 ↗ that's under construction if you've been

10:30 ↗ a your Costco her near our offices

10:32 ↗ there's beautiful construction going on

10:35 ↗ we have a train Tod project that's in

10:38 ↗ the works that we're gonna have a

10:40 ↗ presentation on one of these days when

10:42 ↗ our agendas aren't quite so packed but

10:45 ↗ that is proposed to go right near the

10:47 ↗ Transit Center and that's transit

10:49 ↗ oriented development that include

10:50 ↗ mixed-use affordable housing an array of

10:54 ↗ many wonderful land uses that we're

10:57 ↗ excited about and we now have an

10:59 ↗ ordinance about how to regulate compact

11:01 ↗ schools so that you can get more of a

11:04 ↗ school on a smaller parcel so these are

11:07 ↗ all things that we've done and you've

11:09 ↗ helped with since the adoption of the

11:11 ↗ central plan and standards in 2013 so

11:16 ↗ what might happen in the next 10 to 20

11:18 ↗ years and these are just the ones we

11:20 ↗ know about there's probably a lot out

11:22 ↗ there of course that we don't even know

11:24 ↗ are going to happen to supply the

11:27 ↗ schools are going to have to develop now

11:29 ↗ they have the money they need to find

11:30 ↗ the sites the Costco development is it's

11:34 ↗ going to start building out the

11:35 ↗ light-rail planning that we have to do

11:37 ↗ as a community we have to figure out the

11:40 ↗ Gilman Boulevard vision the plan and

11:42 ↗ reconstruction there's been a lot of

11:44 ↗ talk of how should it look like does it

11:46 ↗ look different to the East versus to the

11:49 ↗ West that's going to be really big in

11:52 ↗ this community

11:53 ↗ Newport Way is going to go under

11:55 ↗ reconstruction we're gonna we're working

11:57 ↗ with the State Park to change some of

11:59 ↗ the things that they do and how they do

12:00 ↗ it in their development agreement the

12:04 ↗ mall Street extension I mean there's

12:06 ↗ just all sorts of things that are coming

12:08 ↗ on online that are going to affect

12:10 ↗ Central Issaquah in the next in fact Ron

12:13 ↗ brought up one last night at the tour is

12:16 ↗ retail gonna change in the next 10 to 20

12:18 ↗ years I mean we might not go to stores

12:20 ↗ as much as we do you know that's

12:22 ↗ fabulous something to think about is our

12:24 ↗ whole concept of daily services question

12:28 ↗ thought can you highlight which of these

12:31 ↗ is like definitely going to happen and

12:33 ↗ which of these like is more planned but

12:35 ↗ net business like finally like the

12:37 ↗ overcrossing like the city really wants

12:39 ↗ that to happen but we still got to shake

12:40 ↗ up millions of dollars for that versus

12:42 ↗ some of these are kind of more

12:44 ↗ guaranteed and in process

12:47 ↗ overcrossing is it's not a thing okay if

12:51 ↗ you're crossing it will happen oh but it

12:55 ↗ might not be over I just mean like can

13:00 ↗ you go through these one by one and say

13:02 ↗ what kind of differentiate what you like

13:03 ↗ like the school is like that will

13:06 ↗ definitely happen there were schools yes

13:07 ↗ light rail yes Gilman Boulevard yes

13:10 ↗ Newports way yes State Park yes ma

13:14 ↗ Street I'm saying yes right no Street

13:16 ↗ yes I 90 crossing maybe not over but

13:21 ↗ crossing yes and me okay I 90 Maple

13:26 ↗ crossing yes Front Street with the state

13:30 ↗ that's got to be a yes yes parks plan

13:34 ↗ yes

13:35 ↗ bike share I'm gonna say yes we're

13:38 ↗ working with other jurisdictions and

13:40 ↗ it's slower than we thought but I it's

13:43 ↗ got to happen within the next ten years

13:45 ↗ okay so you guys feel pretty confident

13:47 ↗ that all of these will happen in some

13:49 ↗ form yes good question though any other

13:54 ↗ questions on influences okay oops

14:00 ↗ come on backwards these are the ten

14:03 ↗ neighborhoods I wanted to show this

14:05 ↗ slide before we dive in just so you can

14:07 ↗ see how they're organized now there's

14:12 ↗ ten they were pretty fun on the tour

14:15 ↗ because it was very dark very fast so

14:19 ↗ this trick question so I see some blue

14:23 ↗ lines on there that are obviously not

14:25 ↗ creaks what are those are those parcel

14:32 ↗ like between Valley and Gilman we've got

14:37 ↗ I think that's called a tributary it's I

14:40 ↗ think they're culverts

14:42 ↗ it's a color that that's they don't do

14:44 ↗ it water yeah yeah they don't meander

14:47 ↗ cuz they're making their they've been

14:49 ↗ man they're and it's all right they're

14:50 ↗ in a ditch pipe sort of a situation

14:53 ↗ curious because they're just too

14:54 ↗ straight

14:55 ↗ they are very straight we have some very

14:57 ↗ straight creeks in our town other

15:00 ↗ questions about the neighborhoods can

15:03 ↗ you go back to the previous page again

15:04 ↗ sorry

15:05 ↗ what's the can you give a quick

15:08 ↗ one-minute what's the Lake Sammamish

15:09 ↗ Park development agreement that's the

15:11 ↗ first time I've heard of that I only

15:13 ↗ know what I don't want to sidetracked us

15:14 ↗ but that one I hadn't never heard of

15:15 ↗ before so some of these things are

15:20 ↗ better defined at this point than others

15:23 ↗ what is going on right this moment is

15:27 ↗ the city got a request from state parks

15:31 ↗ to work on a development agreement and

15:36 ↗ an EIS for Lake Sammamish State Park and

15:41 ↗ I came with an ask to partner with them

15:45 ↗ on a development agreement but it also

15:46 ↗ came with and asked to help them fund

15:49 ↗ the EIS so council in at land and shore

15:53 ↗ committee last week heard an agenda bill

15:56 ↗ heard presentation from staff and State

15:59 ↗ Park staff and agreed to move that

16:02 ↗ agenda bill back to full council with

16:06 ↗ the idea that if full council approves

16:08 ↗ that that money asked to partner with

16:11 ↗ state parks would go into the 2018

16:13 ↗ budget the development agreement has

16:17 ↗ identified a number of possibilities its

16:22 ↗ includes things like moving the entrance

16:25 ↗ of the State Park from where it is now

16:27 ↗ to closer to the interchange of 12th and

16:31 ↗ 56th it's looking at doing things like

16:38 ↗ kind of a natural kind of an eco center

16:42 ↗ so there's a lot of things from the

16:45 ↗ existing master plan which was done in

16:47 ↗ 2007 that there's an opportunity to kind

16:52 ↗ of vet that and evolve that

16:54 ↗ but then there's also an opportunity to

16:57 ↗ look at some other things like possibly

17:00 ↗ taking the existing grass soccer fields

17:03 ↗ and turning them into all-weather fields

17:06 ↗ and making that more of kind of a

17:09 ↗ tournament destination space because

17:12 ↗ there's enough land to do that and so so

17:16 ↗ if we go down this path there'll be

17:19 ↗ plenty of community outreach

17:20 ↗ opportunities to talk about kind of the

17:22 ↗ scoping of what all we include in both

17:25 ↗ the development agreement and the EIS

17:27 ↗ but that's going on right now and the

17:31 ↗ first step is for council to agree to

17:33 ↗ help fund the EIS because if we don't

17:36 ↗ help them fund that it will not happen

17:38 ↗ because they don't have enough money in

17:40 ↗ their budget to do that by themselves

17:43 ↗ great that was more than F information

17:46 ↗ thanks Keith the other thoughts on this

17:53 ↗ and the reason the State Park is so

17:56 ↗ important is it's the whole northern

17:57 ↗ boundary of central so it affects

18:00 ↗ several of the neighborhoods so I had

18:06 ↗ one thought on the the neighborhood

18:07 ↗ shape thinking through this after I went

18:09 ↗ to the Newport way open house on that

18:11 ↗ rebuild oh that when you think of how

18:15 ↗ new poor way looks when you get west of

18:18 ↗ 90 it's very much trying to be the the

18:22 ↗ central part of the neighborhood

18:23 ↗ whereas on these maps it's instead being

18:26 ↗ treated as a border mm-hmm

18:28 ↗ maybe thrown that out for discussion

18:30 ↗ because like 900 makes sense as a

18:31 ↗ boarder between neighborhoods it's very

18:33 ↗ much as a dividing wall very much as

18:35 ↗ like i-90 is so I'm wondering whether or

18:38 ↗ not if you want to frame Western gateway

18:41 ↗ correctly do you want to also include

18:43 ↗ the other side of the street but I know

18:46 ↗ at that point you get out of centralized

18:47 ↗ of kua I'm just I'm just throwing that

18:50 ↗ out there

18:50 ↗ because I'm just thinking of how how the

18:52 ↗ architects sold the Newport Way rebuild

18:54 ↗ in terms of making that very much the

18:56 ↗ center of that part of a sequoia so I'm

19:00 ↗ just gonna I'm gonna add to that because

19:02 ↗ you've opened one of the doors that we

19:05 ↗ want to talk about and that's boundaries

19:07 ↗ yeah

19:07 ↗ so that's boundary here as as Trish

19:13 ↗ mentioned Lake Sammamish State Park is

19:15 ↗ not in central Issaquah because it was

19:18 ↗ actually not in the city when this plan

19:20 ↗ was done so it didn't make sense to

19:22 ↗ include it that would be one question

19:24 ↗ about boundary changes is does the state

19:27 ↗ park want to be in central Issaquah or

19:29 ↗ not we also talked about kind of this

19:33 ↗ area down here at the southeast corner

19:37 ↗ of the Gilman neighborhood and whether

19:39 ↗ or not that makes sense to be in central

19:41 ↗ Issaquah or does that feel more like Old

19:43 ↗ Town and so from a boundary discussion

19:47 ↗ perspective I think there's at least a

19:50 ↗ short list and you guys might have some

19:52 ↗ other suggestions for what to put on the

19:54 ↗ list or not but I think those are some

19:56 ↗ of the conversations we want to have we

20:00 ↗ having that now or should I hold that to

20:02 ↗ later I think from an agenda standpoint

20:05 ↗ I don't want to derail too early no it's

20:07 ↗ part of the discussion so you could

20:09 ↗ certainly start it we have our slides on

20:12 ↗ that at the end okay all Dali but it's

20:15 ↗ it's all it's all good we're gonna do

20:24 ↗ the sideways chart when we actually

20:26 ↗ start doing bold ideas for the divisions

20:29 ↗ but thanks for asking

20:32 ↗ yes so this is the last I think this is

20:37 ↗ the last of the questions that we put in

20:39 ↗ your packet is what does success look

20:40 ↗ like for the visions when we're done

20:43 ↗ with them what would how will we sort of

20:46 ↗ backfill to make sure that these are

20:48 ↗ better perhaps than the ones that we

20:50 ↗ have and one of them was that you can

20:53 ↗ read it and visualize what the future is

20:56 ↗ going to be and although we thought

20:58 ↗ that's what the old visions did

21:00 ↗ apparently we didn't really nail it the

21:04 ↗ second one is that it's specific enough

21:06 ↗ to guide development and the design

21:08 ↗ standards and the example I use for that

21:10 ↗ is for Atlas and gateway if we really

21:13 ↗ wanted mixed-use in those areas we

21:15 ↗ should have actually had the standards

21:17 ↗ require mix

21:18 ↗ juice instead of being aspirational

21:20 ↗ saying it would be great to actually say

21:22 ↗ if you're developing here you have to

21:25 ↗ have two or more uses I mean it's it's

21:28 ↗ something that it's specific enough to

21:30 ↗ translate into exactly what you want and

21:34 ↗ the third one is if there's uncertainty

21:35 ↗ in the standards that you can go back to

21:38 ↗ the vision and you can understand which

21:40 ↗ way the standards were supposed to go

21:42 ↗ and that's easier again that's that

21:46 ↗ could be used for the Atlas and mix

21:48 ↗ juice question also when the development

21:53 ↗ actually occurs that it reflects what

21:55 ↗ was in the vision sort of looking back

21:58 ↗ that yeah that's what we wanted that's

22:01 ↗ what we got kind of a thought any

22:03 ↗ questions on so one thing to add to this

22:08 ↗ whenever you do vision for subsets of

22:11 ↗ alcohol you have to keep the alignment

22:14 ↗ to the hull so would it what is the

22:16 ↗ vision for supply and everything has to

22:18 ↗ tie back to that because if it doesn't

22:20 ↗ then it's pointless developing separate

22:23 ↗ visions I would agree with that as well

22:29 ↗ that what I saw lacking and what I got

22:31 ↗ delivered was an overall vision I

22:34 ↗ mentioned this to Keith it's like we've

22:36 ↗ got ten different puzzle pieces but

22:38 ↗ what's the picture that the puzzle

22:40 ↗ creates when those pieces come together

22:42 ↗ is it devil or is it Madonna because I

22:46 ↗ said to Keith we got to make it

22:48 ↗ Madonna I think within that vision then

22:53 ↗ I think it's got to get more than what

22:56 ↗ the second bullet says it isn't is a

22:57 ↗ vision specific enough it's is the

23:00 ↗ vision city policies and city codes and

23:03 ↗ regulations are those enough to guide

23:07 ↗ development it can't just be a vision

23:09 ↗ it's got to be backed up by regulations

23:12 ↗ codes policies hammer right otherwise

23:16 ↗ you're not going to get get the vision

23:17 ↗ because having sat through the gateway

23:20 ↗ in the ribbon and those discussions as

23:22 ↗ Mel has also is like with River we never

23:26 ↗ envisioned out there

23:28 ↗ Gateway I don't believe having zero lot

23:30 ↗ lines and we decided on our task force

23:33 ↗ we were thinking to keep it more in line

23:35 ↗ with the neighborhoods that were out

23:38 ↗ there but when the development standards

23:40 ↗ for the central area plan were done it

23:43 ↗ was included all the the areas and so

23:46 ↗ now rebus apartments will be zero lot

23:49 ↗ line to Newport way right because of the

23:53 ↗ design codes that were allowed to happen

23:55 ↗ with this so I think some of these when

23:57 ↗ we're talking about the individual areas

24:00 ↗ you also need to make sure that they get

24:02 ↗ implemented through the coats and

24:04 ↗ policies the way you want versus having

24:06 ↗ the zero lot line on a major street

24:09 ↗ right Trish one of the things you one of

24:13 ↗ the earlier slides said is a vision is

24:17 ↗ not standards or code right so I think

24:21 ↗ it's important to understand who that

24:24 ↗ someone is

24:26 ↗ that's in this first bullet point here

24:30 ↗ so that we can understand okay is the

24:33 ↗ vision put forth so that City Council or

24:37 ↗ whatever other committee is pulling

24:40 ↗ together the standards and the code uses

24:42 ↗ it to create those or is it more toward

24:48 ↗ a developer who is going to read this

24:52 ↗ and go oh that was the ideas let's see

24:55 ↗ if I can develop something that meets

24:56 ↗ that right and I think it has to be all

24:58 ↗ of the above and we need to keep those

25:01 ↗ users in mind when we're creating this

25:04 ↗ so that we can answer their question

25:06 ↗ right right good point I do have to say

25:10 ↗ that and I'm sorry I don't remember your

25:12 ↗ name can you have to start with the hole

25:15 ↗ though you start with the first you the

25:17 ↗ hole and then you you break it down into

25:20 ↗ into the different pieces when I was

25:22 ↗ looking at it it it concerned me that I

25:25 ↗ didn't know how those boundaries were

25:27 ↗ created because I don't know what

25:29 ↗ they're the entire vision is

25:31 ↗ so creating subsets it made no sense to

25:36 ↗ me because I couldn't figure out how

25:37 ↗ those subsets came right right good

25:41 ↗ question and that started from how many

25:45 ↗ years I'll say five years that we worked

25:48 ↗ on central it was to meet the next round

25:51 ↗ of growth targets from the state which

25:53 ↗ is why we never thought that the State

25:55 ↗ Park or environmental of areas though it

25:59 ↗ should be in there because the purpose

26:00 ↗ of the central plan was to meet the

26:02 ↗ growth targets for jobs and housing so

26:04 ↗ to put something like the State Park in

26:06 ↗ there would have diluted the land

26:09 ↗ because we knew you know we can't put

26:10 ↗ jobs on housing in the State Park and

26:12 ↗ yet it would have given us a huge more

26:14 ↗ acreage to work with and so that for us

26:18 ↗ in the planning that's not what our

26:20 ↗ point was our point was we need an area

26:23 ↗ that's not an existing neighborhood to

26:25 ↗ put the new growth because we didn't

26:27 ↗ want it on the hillsides

26:28 ↗ you know we didn't want it in South Cove

26:30 ↗ we didn't want it in any established

26:31 ↗ neighborhoods we wanted a new area that

26:34 ↗ wouldn't displace any neighborhoods to

26:36 ↗ put the new the new growth and so that's

26:38 ↗ where the boundary came up with there's

26:42 ↗ only there were only 700 units in there

26:44 ↗ at the time we did this and this would

26:47 ↗ be able to handle that 2006 to 2013

26:52 ↗ one-state growth targets that we had to

26:54 ↗ meet so that's where the boundary came

26:56 ↗ from and then we worked out the internal

26:59 ↗ boundaries to see if each of the

27:01 ↗ neighborhood had its own flavor had its

27:03 ↗ distinct jobs housing balance or some of

27:07 ↗ them have better parks and trail systems

27:10 ↗ some of them are a service area for

27:12 ↗ example down where the shop and some of

27:14 ↗ our industrial areas are but to the

27:17 ↗ short answer is the main reason that we

27:19 ↗ made the boundary this way was to meet

27:21 ↗ the state growth targets for jobs and

27:24 ↗ housing so yes I think it's I think

27:30 ↗ there's a couple things we need to point

27:31 ↗ out the task force came to the

27:33 ↗ conclusion not everybody agreed

27:37 ↗ I think we came to the conclusion that

27:39 ↗ the policy of going through this was

27:42 ↗ because we needed to accept a lot of

27:44 ↗ growth we didn't want to put it on the

27:46 ↗ hillsides and we decided the only way we

27:48 ↗ were going to get that growth in

27:50 ↗ Issaquah which was required by the state

27:52 ↗ was to have more urban standards so the

27:56 ↗ vision while it was just a very very

27:58 ↗ narrow vision it was we're going to

28:01 ↗ become an urban city rather than a

28:03 ↗ suburban city and I think that's what

28:05 ↗ drove most of this the other thing to

28:08 ↗ keep in mind is at the time that we were

28:10 ↗ going through all of this

28:11 ↗ Bellevue was developing Redmond was

28:14 ↗ developing Kirkland was developing

28:16 ↗ Issaquah was stagnant nobody wanted to

28:19 ↗ do anything here we were trying to

28:21 ↗ figure out ways we could get people to

28:23 ↗ come here and develop so what happened

28:26 ↗ was was once the CIP was done it just

28:29 ↗ kind of caught everybody off guard this

28:31 ↗ was a 30-year plan and and what was

28:34 ↗ supposed to happen over 30 years

28:36 ↗ happened within 10 years and that's what

28:39 ↗ caught everybody off guard we all sat

28:42 ↗ there and said well we don't need to

28:43 ↗ worry about making these regulations so

28:47 ↗ strict because we're not having anybody

28:49 ↗ come to us now with no restrictions so

28:53 ↗ if we make them real strict we're not

28:55 ↗ going to be able to meet a certain meet

28:57 ↗ our growth targets so as we go through

29:00 ↗ this process now as a city I think we

29:02 ↗ need to look at those things and say the

29:05 ↗ same thing you know what's important for

29:08 ↗ the city affordable housing was one of

29:10 ↗ the things that we put a lot of effort

29:12 ↗ into we tried to do in Santas we came up

29:14 ↗ with all ideas you still have to get

29:19 ↗ from a task force or a commission

29:22 ↗ through the City Council and

29:25 ↗ I'm not criticizing anybody I'm just

29:27 ↗ pointing out a lot of what the task

29:29 ↗ force did got lost from from task force

29:34 ↗ to implementation and some of the things

29:37 ↗ that got lost were very critical things

29:39 ↗ to the success of how this could have

29:42 ↗ worked I think that's one of the things

29:44 ↗ the Planning Policy Commission needs to

29:46 ↗ look at now as we move forward so that

29:49 ↗ those things don't get lost again if the

29:55 ↗ task force come up with a written vision

29:59 ↗ or is it just a you know more urban more

30:03 ↗ this more that they actually came up

30:06 ↗ with it that you can they came up with a

30:08 ↗ plan that had actually standards in it

30:11 ↗ they worked so hard and for so long that

30:14 ↗ they actually came up with a hybrid that

30:16 ↗ because they weren't satisfied with just

30:17 ↗ the policies to your credit they

30:21 ↗ actually put the standards with it so

30:23 ↗ that there was no question about what

30:25 ↗ they thought was the best for the

30:26 ↗ subdivision but that's not what got

30:29 ↗ adopted that what got adopted was just

30:31 ↗ the vision plan document and then the

30:33 ↗ standards came after but I'd have to

30:36 ↗ look back to see how I can think that

30:40 ↗ you know when you talk about this you

30:42 ↗ have to you're talking about the vision

30:43 ↗ you know we're gonna do all these things

30:45 ↗ but it would be nice to see a vision

30:48 ↗ there so that we can say yeah that would

30:52 ↗ means the vision right I don't know what

30:55 ↗ you guys was this it's like two

30:57 ↗ sentences I'll just read it very quickly

30:59 ↗ centralist quad vision guide the

31:02 ↗ evolution of central Issaquah from a

31:04 ↗ place known primarily for strip malls

31:06 ↗ and office buildings into a closely

31:08 ↗ aligned series of mixed-use

31:10 ↗ neighborhoods that create and maintain

31:12 ↗ an exceptional quality of life for

31:15 ↗ Issaquah residents and then

31:17 ↗ subcategories of that vision included

31:19 ↗ environment with goals urban community

31:22 ↗ with goals mobility and connect

31:24 ↗ connectivity with goals and economic

31:26 ↗ vitality so its laid out pretty well and

31:30 ↗ then each neighborhood at the time

31:33 ↗ had a vision as well right but within

31:36 ↗ that vision I'm gonna go one step

31:38 ↗ further just quickly there were a couple

31:41 ↗ key points part of the vision was that

31:43 ↗ 90% of the valley for right now was

31:46 ↗ impervious surface and we said even as

31:49 ↗ we densify and grow we've got to improve

31:51 ↗ upon that we can't let 90% of the valley

31:55 ↗ floor be impervious surface and that was

31:58 ↗ a key element of the vision second key

31:59 ↗ element that the glue that held

32:02 ↗ everything together was the concept of a

32:04 ↗ green necklace an inner trail system so

32:10 ↗ that every resident even in dense urban

32:12 ↗ neighborhoods would have nature at your

32:14 ↗ doorstep or transit ability easy access

32:19 ↗ to transit connecting to the outer green

32:22 ↗ necklace of Cougars Glocke tiger and

32:25 ↗ grande rigs so that every citizen could

32:28 ↗ walk from their condo apartment home on

32:32 ↗ the inner link the inner green necklace

32:34 ↗ or up to the mountains and enjoy the

32:37 ↗ lifestyle it defines Issaquah compared

32:41 ↗ to any other community in this area that

32:43 ↗ was the goal and for those of you that

32:47 ↗ haven't read the central plan vision in

32:49 ↗ a while this is it in the plan there on

32:53 ↗ our website but it started out with the

32:55 ↗ overarching that that has what Ken

32:59 ↗ talked about is the the strip malls and

33:02 ↗ office buildings to turn that into

33:04 ↗ cohesive neighborhoods and it had the

33:07 ↗ guiding principles were the environment

33:09 ↗ housing sense of community

33:11 ↗ transportation and essential services

33:13 ↗ economic vitality and innovation that

33:16 ↗ was the overarching for all of central

33:18 ↗ and then each of them each district had

33:20 ↗ its own existing conditions in it you

33:24 ↗ know to that what Ken had what we had

33:29 ↗ put together were talked about nutrition

33:31 ↗ if you go if you scroll up to the the

33:34 ↗ vision itself and strip malls and office

33:37 ↗ buildings into what we've come up with

33:42 ↗ - where was that this is into a closely

33:46 ↗ aligned series of mixed-use

33:48 ↗ neighborhoods that create maintain

33:49 ↗ exceptional quality and it's interesting

33:51 ↗ they got changed from a series of

33:54 ↗ neighborhoods to a more cohesive

33:57 ↗ neighborhood so vision wise when it came

34:00 ↗ to the plan it was just one neighborhood

34:03 ↗ at least then what got changed by time I

34:06 ↗ went through councils so right in terms

34:08 ↗ of talking about do we need ten

34:09 ↗ neighborhoods right first what with what

34:15 ↗ exact document was given to city

34:18 ↗ councilor was presented to City Council

34:20 ↗ that they said this isn't meeting our

34:24 ↗ idea of what the neighborhood stuff

34:28 ↗ would be revamped for the moratorium you

34:30 ↗ mean recently like last yeah I don't

34:35 ↗ know if we take that out of our hat it

34:37 ↗ had the the new that had what it is now

34:40 ↗ it had what it would be in the future

34:42 ↗ it had implementation strategies on how

34:45 ↗ to get there it was sort of a three-part

34:48 ↗ piece oh it wasn't what for the original

34:51 ↗ task force had done correct it was

34:54 ↗ something it was the evolution of and

34:57 ↗ was that based on UPC's work or based on

35:01 ↗ it and it was the open house that you

35:04 ↗ all had in March it was the focus groups

35:06 ↗ with the property owners and business

35:08 ↗ owners it was the two outreach meetings

35:10 ↗ at Atlas and at the foo barn and then we

35:14 ↗ moved it all together and tried to

35:16 ↗ figure out what the feet what it was

35:19 ↗ telling us about what the community

35:20 ↗ wanted for the future now the reason I

35:22 ↗ bring that up is because I'm not sure

35:24 ↗ whether City Council and generally

35:27 ↗ people are having more problem with the

35:31 ↗ presentation and the way the information

35:34 ↗ was conveyed so that was clear concise

35:36 ↗ descriptive etc or whether it's because

35:40 ↗ they didn't like the content the content

35:44 ↗ didn't meet their needs

35:46 ↗ and so I think that ultimately is the

35:48 ↗ big question that needs to be answered

35:50 ↗ before we try and come up with a

35:54 ↗ document that satisfies that well in in

36:00 ↗ my humble opinion if you all get a

36:02 ↗ document that you're happy with then you

36:05 ↗ help us go to the council and say we

36:09 ↗ felt strongly that this is what central

36:11 ↗ needs to get through the next 10 to 20

36:14 ↗ years as well as insisted me on

36:18 ↗ something so I think so to be clear and

36:23 ↗ we can put the documents that we shared

36:26 ↗ with council committee if we didn't want

36:29 ↗ we didn't want you guys to start with

36:30 ↗ something we wanted you two guys to

36:32 ↗ start with a clean slate you know what I

36:35 ↗ heard was that some of the neighborhoods

36:38 ↗ there's some clarity on what they're

36:40 ↗ going to be for example Pickering you

36:44 ↗ know you've got we talked about this a

36:46 ↗ little bit on the tour last night you

36:47 ↗ know Pickering you've got Costco and

36:50 ↗ Costco's continual kind of increase in

36:54 ↗ space as the driver for that

36:55 ↗ neighborhood and so talking about what's

36:58 ↗ going to happen in Pickering it's pretty

37:00 ↗ easy to have a conversation about that

37:02 ↗ you go over the other side of the

37:04 ↗ freeway and you go to Gilman

37:05 ↗ neighborhood or Tibbets Valley likewise

37:08 ↗ I think you know there's there's enough

37:11 ↗ that we know about land owners and about

37:13 ↗ things that are going on that you can

37:15 ↗ have a pretty pretty concise

37:17 ↗ conversation about well what's that

37:19 ↗ going to look like in ten years or 20

37:21 ↗ years and that's just going to depend on

37:23 ↗ market not on other variabilities but

37:26 ↗ then you get to some of the other

37:27 ↗ neighborhoods and it gets a little bit

37:30 ↗ squishier you know like Lake Sammamish

37:33 ↗ neighborhood which right now is three

37:37 ↗ office buildings a mini storage motel

37:40 ↗ and an IHOP and a gas station you know

37:42 ↗ okay what is that what's it going to be

37:44 ↗ twenty years from now maybe it's the

37:46 ↗ same thing and if the vision says that's

37:49 ↗ what it is and that's great maybe that's

37:51 ↗ what the vision should say so these are

37:53 ↗ the conversations we need to have when

37:55 ↗ we get down to that grain of detail

37:58 ↗ but I don't know that an expectation

38:01 ↗ that every neighborhood assuming there's

38:04 ↗ still ten at the end of the day is gonna

38:06 ↗ be mixed use and Belltown it's just not

38:10 ↗ going to be and I think this is part of

38:12 ↗ the conversation we need to have so

38:15 ↗ that's what I've heard

38:16 ↗ now understand this has only seen a

38:20 ↗ conversation with three council members

38:22 ↗ because it's really been even though we

38:24 ↗ did a presentation at a cow the

38:28 ↗ committee of the whole

38:28 ↗ really this level of conversation only

38:30 ↗ happened to land in Shore which is three

38:32 ↗ council members and not the whole seven

38:35 ↗ so part of what we want to get out of

38:37 ↗ this is you guys and us kind of getting

38:41 ↗ to a point where we think all right you

38:43 ↗ know what

38:44 ↗ either the visions are great the way

38:45 ↗ they are don't touch them or we go

38:47 ↗ through a process here where we change

38:49 ↗ them and then we bring something forward

38:52 ↗ to the council and say you may not

38:54 ↗ completely understand these or even

38:56 ↗ agree with these but we as staff and the

38:59 ↗ community feel like this is where these

39:01 ↗ need to go with that level of buy-in I

39:04 ↗ think we'll get the council to agree to

39:06 ↗ adopt the revisions to divisions so we

39:13 ↗ can start wherever you want to Lindsay

39:15 ↗ if you want to start with looking at

39:17 ↗ what an example of what we shared with

39:19 ↗ the committee we can do that or we can

39:21 ↗ continue to have this conversation and

39:23 ↗ kind of flow through some of the

39:26 ↗ discussion points candidly what I would

39:29 ↗ say is some of it was actual verbage so

39:34 ↗ some of the words that we put in some of

39:36 ↗ those documents needed to be wordsmith a

39:39 ↗ bit but it was really more philosophical

39:43 ↗ I think is kind of the the wall we hit

39:45 ↗ at committee I think one of the reasons

39:48 ↗ of the moratorium is because council and

39:53 ↗ probably the rest of the community

39:55 ↗ wasn't content with what was happening

39:58 ↗ and so I think what the council wants is

40:01 ↗ a more definite

40:02 ↗ how we're going to get to where we're

40:05 ↗ going to get to and what specifics is it

40:07 ↗ that we want to get to so instead of

40:10 ↗ going through all this other stuff why

40:12 ↗ don't we start with each one of the ten

40:15 ↗ to see if it works what it is some

40:18 ↗ people understand what's in it and I

40:20 ↗ know that some of the committee members

40:24 ↗ are at a loss because they did not go

40:27 ↗ over the tour yesterday and I think that

40:29 ↗ once they do that it's going to make it

40:32 ↗ a lot more alive to them so that they're

40:37 ↗ going to be able to see it a little bit

40:38 ↗ better

40:39 ↗ so can we I know some of the task force

40:46 ↗ members will disagree with me but Atlas

40:48 ↗ was not completely against the CIP CIP

40:53 ↗ looked at using that list maybe not in

40:55 ↗ that location but atlas as what the CIP

40:58 ↗ was going to give us one of the things

41:01 ↗ that really colors aside one of the

41:04 ↗ things that really hit the community was

41:05 ↗ we don't want that here we're not ready

41:08 ↗ for that here and and I think I have to

41:11 ↗ agree with Lindsay yeah I think you

41:13 ↗ better look at what do you want the

41:15 ↗ future here to look like and what do you

41:17 ↗ want that timing to be a lot of people

41:19 ↗ live here because it isn't downtown

41:21 ↗ Bellevue and what CIP is doing is saying

41:24 ↗ we're going to make it's a quote more

41:26 ↗ like downtown Bellevue because we want

41:29 ↗ to conserve the area between here and

41:32 ↗ the mountain as what it is and the

41:36 ↗ people that would move in there and

41:37 ↗ build houses along the freeway should

41:40 ↗ move here where the services are and the

41:42 ↗ transportation and stuff and our instead

41:44 ↗ of moving out there and I think that's

41:47 ↗ the bigger decision that that the whole

41:49 ↗ city needs to look at how are we ready

41:51 ↗ for Atlas and the other growth that's

41:55 ↗ coming because that isn't contrary to

41:58 ↗ the CIP is just we didn't have the

42:00 ↗ regulations in place to make it exactly

42:03 ↗ what the CIP should be

42:07 ↗ if we were gonna go through the the ten

42:10 ↗ different neighborhoods

42:11 ↗ can I offer one prior suggestion maybe

42:14 ↗ before because I asked Trish she has to

42:16 ↗ send questions in advance and what I

42:19 ↗ wanted to know is if we had this vision

42:22 ↗ and this plan what went wrong on Atlas

42:26 ↗ and Gateway why did those happen and

42:29 ↗ where are the gaps out and not to blame

42:34 ↗ anybody and not even to criticize just

42:36 ↗ how do we do better going forward what

42:38 ↗ went wrong in those developments

42:41 ↗ happening it allowed that to happen

42:44 ↗ and how do we then and then ten

42:47 ↗ neighbourhoods as we go through those

42:48 ↗ make sure we don't end up with that

42:50 ↗ again well I think that main reason they

42:53 ↗ happen was because we didn't have the

42:56 ↗ codes written and the requirements

42:58 ↗ specific for that for the city to say no

43:01 ↗ you can't do that because of this

43:03 ↗ because it's in writing and we've agreed

43:04 ↗ to it and I'm hoping that by doing going

43:08 ↗ through and finding each one what you

43:11 ↗ really need you're going to come up with

43:13 ↗ the city's going to come up with those

43:14 ↗ codes so yeah oh absolutely

43:18 ↗ I mean I think that's what the City

43:19 ↗ Council wants that's what the moratorium

43:22 ↗ was you know we don't want this what's

43:25 ↗ going to happen and I think the second

43:27 ↗ thing of that is people of the community

43:29 ↗ have to understand where you're going or

43:35 ↗ what the city is planning and they can't

43:39 ↗ just wake up one morning and there's a

43:41 ↗ 12 story building in the middle of

43:43 ↗ somewhere they have to know what's going

43:46 ↗ to be around it and why it's there and

43:48 ↗ how it's going to be handled so I'm

43:50 ↗ gonna watch these the last minute

43:52 ↗ landing the shores but I would like to

43:55 ↗ understand what was land insurance

43:58 ↗ objections itemized them and like

44:01 ↗ five bullets what was their objections

44:04 ↗ and how can we work with those

44:06 ↗ objections and maybe use those to guide

44:08 ↗ us through because they obviously have

44:10 ↗ if highlighted certain areas thanks ed

44:13 ↗ this is not acceptable so what are those

44:16 ↗ I think and I'm not putting words in

44:20 ↗ their mouth but I feel very blessed to

44:24 ↗ be a long-range planner because I think

44:26 ↗ about many many years all the time I

44:29 ↗ mean that's how my brain works but most

44:31 ↗ people think about planning a vacation

44:34 ↗ you know planning a wedding planning an

44:37 ↗ event which is like a year out maybe and

44:40 ↗ so that's as far as a lot of folks can

44:42 ↗ think and so when you say five years you

44:46 ↗ know or you say ten years and people

44:48 ↗ just I think and again not putting words

44:51 ↗ in their mother I think they were having

44:52 ↗ troubles thinking that far ahead with

44:56 ↗ words and pictures and it was hard for

44:58 ↗ them to really see what would happen out

45:01 ↗ there based on words and pictures

45:03 ↗ because again as Ken said there's no

45:05 ↗ code yet we have implementation

45:07 ↗ strategies that that would help us get

45:10 ↗ to the vision but though we don't have

45:13 ↗ those now we just know what they're

45:15 ↗ going to be in order to strengthen the

45:16 ↗ vision to make it happen and I think

45:18 ↗ that's the struggle that they were

45:20 ↗ having is there were words and pictures

45:22 ↗ and things we were going to do but the

45:25 ↗ whole package wasn't there for them to

45:27 ↗ to see and I think if we would have said

45:30 ↗ well what if we have somebody that just

45:33 ↗ came in the door and the permit center

45:35 ↗ and said I do want to do that use there

45:38 ↗ you know would that make it go wow you

45:40 ↗ mean really we could get that because I

45:42 ↗ think there was the feeling of would we

45:43 ↗ ever even get that are they impossible

45:46 ↗ like you mentioned weed in the tour are

45:48 ↗ some of the visions impossible well we

45:50 ↗ don't think they are we think they can

45:54 ↗ happen and so I think that was the

45:56 ↗ hardest part for them was to think out

45:58 ↗ 20 years or even 10 years to these

46:00 ↗ things happening to two more

46:03 ↗ neighborhoods having the trails and the

46:06 ↗ ways to get around that's not just a car

46:08 ↗ you know because that's a budget item at

46:11 ↗ it has to get into the parks plant you

46:13 ↗ know there's pieces there's ways that

46:14 ↗ you have to get there but when you think

46:17 ↗ of Old Town when we did old town 20

46:19 ↗ years ago we wanted a big park now we

46:22 ↗ have confluence we wanted more community

46:24 ↗ buildings downtown we have the community

46:26 ↗ center we have the library now we have

46:28 ↗ improvements to the fish hatchery I mean

46:31 ↗ also many things in Old Town came true

46:33 ↗ because we made the vision and we just

46:35 ↗ started pounding through the budget

46:37 ↗ items through the work plan items and a

46:40 ↗ lot of really great things happen for

46:42 ↗ Old Town and we think the same can

46:44 ↗ happen for Central Church with that what

46:49 ↗ you just explained is a wish list of

46:52 ↗ items I think that should be in the

46:54 ↗ visions for each district or

46:56 ↗ neighborhood a wish list of what should

46:59 ↗ be there right and then I also think

47:01 ↗ each neighborhood and a at a high level

47:05 ↗ we should have a success checklist what

47:09 ↗ does success look like if we get these

47:13 ↗ things this is successful and also an

47:16 ↗ implementation checklist this will this

47:21 ↗ district or these neighborhood visions

47:24 ↗ will not work unless these things are

47:28 ↗ done which includes standards and codes

47:31 ↗ right and so I think that we could

47:33 ↗ clarify those things that tells City

47:36 ↗ Council here's the options that need to

47:39 ↗ be taken here's how we're going to

47:40 ↗ measure this here's what success looks

47:42 ↗ like so can i clarify for in terms of

47:50 ↗ vision statements it's never a wish list

47:53 ↗ what it is is a picture of the future

47:55 ↗ it's like the Microsoft a computer on

47:58 ↗ every desktop right it's that kind of

48:01 ↗ picture and how you get there has to be

48:04 ↗ has to be planned through that's where

48:07 ↗ you do short term goals and long term

48:10 ↗ goals and so actually I was going to

48:12 ↗ suggest that whenever you do vision for

48:14 ↗ different team

48:16 ↗ different commissions for any purpose

48:18 ↗ you need an a really experienced

48:20 ↗ facilitator because it seems like

48:23 ↗ they're there their checklists or

48:26 ↗ they're just lists of stuff to do and

48:28 ↗ that is really not what a vision is a

48:31 ↗ vision is is designed to to be a

48:35 ↗ something aspirational as you had on

48:37 ↗ that list but it's it's a vision of the

48:40 ↗ future what what is this going to look

48:42 ↗ like you know twenty years from now and

48:45 ↗ and right now that central is the qua

48:47 ↗ vision is not really a vision you know

48:50 ↗ it's it just it's just a bunch of stuff

48:52 ↗ and and that's not really what we're

48:54 ↗ trying to do we're trying we have a

48:56 ↗ vision of what the the city should look

48:58 ↗ like right or we want to pull that out

49:01 ↗ of people and so you honestly I'm

49:04 ↗ thinking attend neighborhoods and this

49:06 ↗ group in in a short period of time it's

49:09 ↗ it's really not doable in my opinion I

49:14 ↗ think I think you need working sessions

49:15 ↗ to get to that place and working

49:18 ↗ sessions like brainstorming type working

49:20 ↗ sessions that's just my right well we're

49:22 ↗ gonna start brainstorming in a little

49:24 ↗ bit but yeah yeah good thoughts you know

49:27 ↗ as we're baking this like we've been

49:30 ↗ talking a lot about the growth 7,000

49:33 ↗ it's kind of a target and I think the

49:37 ↗ reality is if built out to capacity we

49:40 ↗ could be looking at something far larger

49:42 ↗ than 7,000 we look out 20 years from now

49:44 ↗ it's entirely possible we could fit the

49:47 ↗ entire population of Issaquah and

49:50 ↗ Pickering so I think from a vision

49:54 ↗ standpoint we need to look much larger

49:57 ↗ than we're looking now I'm making sure

49:59 ↗ that we have the infrastructure to

50:00 ↗ support a much larger population because

50:03 ↗ the reality is I think we will get it to

50:08 ↗ get to the I gotta mention as I was

50:10 ↗ pointing out to Keith before the meeting

50:12 ↗ mr. claw is so special and unique

50:14 ↗ compared to any other community in this

50:17 ↗ region given the Issaquah Alps the

50:19 ↗ salmon streams Lake Sammamish access to

50:21 ↗ the Cascades

50:22 ↗ we'll have people crawling over each

50:25 ↗ other to get here just like I did in

50:27 ↗ 1984 when I

50:28 ↗ to live here and we've seen that ever

50:30 ↗ since I moved here look at mystical

50:33 ↗ Highlands built out when I moved here

50:35 ↗ that was all big forested trees up there

50:38 ↗ talus the same way and those two

50:41 ↗ developments are hugely popular so we

50:46 ↗ need to dictate what we want we don't

50:49 ↗ let developers come in here and tell us

50:51 ↗ what they want to do we should be

50:53 ↗ telling them what we want to do totally

50:55 ↗ agree with you I think that might be

50:56 ↗ something good to have in the vision

50:59 ↗ particularly when we're an update the

51:01 ↗ paragraph that they can that you read to

51:03 ↗ us that the kickoff I think maybe make

51:05 ↗ it very clear that while the city is

51:07 ↗ still very clearly committed to

51:09 ↗ accommodating a pretty massive amount of

51:11 ↗ growth over the next 20-30 years make

51:13 ↗ very clear the cities this is a growth

51:16 ↗ center we're going to absorbing a

51:18 ↗ substantial amount of growth but make it

51:21 ↗ very clear the city's not interested in

51:23 ↗ having that growth immediately but first

51:25 ↗ making sure that we have the

51:27 ↗ infrastructure of air in place to

51:29 ↗ facilitate that growth not not not at

51:31 ↗ all back away from our commitment to

51:33 ↗ grow centralizer qua but to ensure that

51:37 ↗ with the city is making the investments

51:39 ↗ whether it be parks whether it be

51:41 ↗ infrastructure whether it be the school

51:42 ↗ district making sure that stuff gets

51:44 ↗ done not initially before but

51:47 ↗ concurrently with the growth because we

51:49 ↗ are in a position that we have met but

51:52 ↗ specially given that we've got I think

51:54 ↗ another 500 units still the building

51:56 ↗ Highlands and whatnot the city is very

51:58 ↗ much made its short term commitments to

52:01 ↗ the growth Management Act and so I think

52:03 ↗ we have room that if the city doesn't

52:04 ↗ grow as much over the next five or ten

52:07 ↗ years because we build busy doing things

52:09 ↗ like building bridges across 90 which

52:11 ↗ are very expensive will take time that's

52:13 ↗ fine and that that is very much in

52:15 ↗ accordance with the vision that there

52:17 ↗ that we may not get a massive amount of

52:20 ↗ growth in the next five to eight to ten

52:23 ↗ years insofar as the city is still

52:25 ↗ planning and building and investing for

52:27 ↗ a much larger amount of growth to be

52:28 ↗ coming in the 10 to 20 to 30 year vein

52:32 ↗ and I think that might be very helpful

52:33 ↗ to have that at the very beginning of

52:34 ↗ the vision

52:35 ↗ and put the for the City Council it's

52:37 ↗ because the city still needs to make

52:39 ↗ very clear to the region when you look

52:41 ↗ in the context of things like Metro

52:43 ↗ connects and the Sound Transit station

52:46 ↗ the city still very needs to continue to

52:48 ↗ show to the region that we're going to

52:50 ↗ turn this into an urban core of some

52:52 ↗ form that still needs it very much be

52:54 ↗ there but we're not unlike Bellevue

52:57 ↗ unlike you know the U district and in

53:00 ↗ Seattle that's not gonna be happening in

53:01 ↗ the next five years I might it might be

53:03 ↗ a little bit further down and then we're

53:04 ↗ just getting ready for when that growth

53:06 ↗ will come right and that's it along the

53:08 ↗ same lines of Lindsay's comments that

53:10 ↗ there you have short term items that you

53:12 ↗ want to do for your budgeting purposes

53:14 ↗ and then long term so that there's sort

53:17 ↗ of a whole journey if you will that

53:19 ↗ helps council and the community

53:20 ↗ understand how do you get how do you get

53:23 ↗ to the end yeah and I think I think when

53:26 ↗ I'm saying it would be great to frame

53:27 ↗ that first and then that leads to write

53:31 ↗ more tactical stuff SS as Lindsay

53:33 ↗ Lindsay was suggesting right to real

53:37 ↗ estate cycles away from this starting so

53:42 ↗ vision is what you're trying to be

53:43 ↗ mission is how you're going to would you

53:45 ↗ what do you do while you're trying to

53:46 ↗ get there so what you're talking about

53:48 ↗ is actually the a mission state long

53:50 ↗ with this yeah very much so and then

53:51 ↗ making it more clear than normally what

53:53 ↗ we want the city to look like but when

53:55 ↗ we want it to look like that and to make

53:57 ↗ clear that this is a long term vision

53:59 ↗ and that if it doesn't happen

54:00 ↗ immediately that we're okay with that if

54:02 ↗ we are going to lay strict vertical mix

54:05 ↗ use if the you know the economists that

54:08 ↗ he came and said were five to ten years

54:10 ↗ and that penciling out we're okay with

54:13 ↗ that because we still think it will

54:14 ↗ happen as long as the region keeps

54:16 ↗ growing so we're gonna set our

54:17 ↗ regulations so that when you know that

54:20 ↗ the financial metrics finally tilt

54:21 ↗ enough that it is worthwhile building we

54:23 ↗ you know we've got we've got the rules

54:25 ↗ ready then so there's some transit won't

54:26 ↗ be here till what 2040 - yeah so we

54:29 ↗ don't grow too fast I mean we got time

54:32 ↗ I'll be happy we start to build out by

54:35 ↗ 2040 - can we stir this the right way

54:40 ↗ yeah

54:41 ↗ wisely I can't you know you're gonna

54:44 ↗ build out these ten sections and they're

54:50 ↗ gonna have all in buildings on it with

54:52 ↗ five or ten feet tall whatever

54:55 ↗ storeys tall they're not gonna come in

54:58 ↗ in 10 years and tear them down and start

54:59 ↗ over again you're looking at that long

55:02 ↗ range is what you're talking about right

55:05 ↗ now and and do you want 30,000 people's

55:09 ↗ in in in picker I certainly do not

55:13 ↗ before that train station is there okay

55:17 ↗ we're gonna open it up to what Joan said

55:19 ↗ to start throwing out ideas for each of

55:22 ↗ them and I want to just sort of not

55:24 ↗ narrow us but these were the criteria or

55:28 ↗ the categories that I missed whatever

55:31 ↗ that was that they that we were using to

55:34 ↗ sort of get our bold ideas our inspiring

55:37 ↗ ideas for each of these pieces for each

55:40 ↗ of the just neighborhoods so we're gonna

55:48 ↗ start and I have the existing visions if

55:50 ↗ we wanted to flash back to them at any

55:53 ↗ time but this is the overarching vision

55:55 ↗ and then Sammamish Park we remember

55:58 ↗ where Sammamish Park was it's directly

56:00 ↗ south of Lake Sammamish State Park and

56:03 ↗ this and the other piece to answer what

56:07 ↗ was confusing to the council is we had

56:10 ↗ current language it is this now and then

56:13 ↗ we had future language it will be this

56:15 ↗ to try to keep them keep it separate of

56:19 ↗ what's existing and what we hope it to

56:20 ↗ be and so we thought for you all tonight

56:22 ↗ we were just going to start with what it

56:24 ↗ is jump in jump in we had one question

56:33 ↗ was do we need to

56:34 ↗ just drinks is that the right number now

56:38 ↗ you have to go through all ginned and

56:39 ↗ then at the end say you know we think we

56:41 ↗ really just need three or four so maybe

56:43 ↗ we should have the question first about

56:45 ↗ okay because we thought that once you

56:49 ↗ started thinking about little and big

56:51 ↗ and building out and not maybe then that

56:54 ↗ would spark the question of wow this

56:56 ↗ this is really like its neighbor it

56:58 ↗ really doesn't need to be on its own you

57:00 ↗ could go the other way if people know

57:02 ↗ that districts well enough to know each

57:10 ↗ one of these districts in a different

57:12 ↗ light simply because Keith would say you

57:17 ↗ know we can't do this because this owner

57:19 ↗ is here and he's going to do this and

57:21 ↗ and the creek is here and it's it's you

57:26 ↗ know whatever but when you look at the

57:28 ↗ decisions that you made for the ten

57:30 ↗ areas they are completely different and

57:34 ↗ I don't think that you can make join a

57:38 ↗ couple of them together because you're

57:41 ↗ going to lose the ability to make them

57:44 ↗ different and you don't want a thing

57:47 ↗ over the city where everything looks the

57:50 ↗ same you want some variety and some

57:53 ↗ excitement and so I don't see any

57:59 ↗ personally I don't see any that you can

58:01 ↗ get rid of so just two I'd like to kind

58:07 ↗ of recap because we've I feel like we've

58:09 ↗ been saying a lot of the same things and

58:10 ↗ kind of working our way up and down the

58:13 ↗ spectrum of vision to implementation and

58:16 ↗ talking about all these different things

58:18 ↗ and I feel like if we don't start at the

58:20 ↗ top at the city level of what is the

58:23 ↗ vision for the city and work our way

58:25 ↗ down to a more granular level that we're

58:28 ↗ gonna end up kind of in this loop and

58:30 ↗ we're gonna get to some conclusion and

58:34 ↗ then come back to something that kind of

58:37 ↗ effects that so if I could recommend

58:40 ↗ kind of

58:41 ↗ action plan based on what we've talked

58:44 ↗ about so far if we could agree on kind

58:47 ↗ of a city vision if you will in in terms

58:51 ↗ of central Issaquah so before we get

58:54 ↗ there kind of the city at the city level

58:57 ↗ and maybe that's already established and

58:59 ↗ we say okay great move on and then the

59:02 ↗ central vision and then agreeing on the

59:06 ↗ central boundary what what we're talking

59:08 ↗ about for central what that is and then

59:11 ↗ looking at districts and district

59:15 ↗ visions and then establishing those or

59:18 ↗ agreeing with those district boundaries

59:20 ↗ district two uses and district features

59:23 ↗ and then from there once we've got all

59:28 ↗ that kind of established or agreed upon

59:30 ↗ then we could you know at later dates

59:34 ↗ jump into the implementation of how do

59:36 ↗ we make sure that that all happens I was

59:41 ↗ gonna find a slide when did we go to cow

59:46 ↗ in 24 count visions oh thank you I'm

59:49 ↗ looking at the thing zone where is it

59:51 ↗ I'm just sleepy

59:55 ↗ would it be because I'm looking for we

59:58 ↗ made a slide that had what central

1:00:01 ↗ Issaquah is that I think John would get

1:00:03 ↗ to what we think central Issaquah the

1:00:06 ↗ purpose sort of of central Issaquah

1:00:08 ↗ within the whole city that would be the

1:00:15 ↗ comprehensive plan can because I think

1:00:20 ↗ you need to look at the overall city

1:00:22 ↗ like he's saying because one of the

1:00:24 ↗ things I heard people saying before is

1:00:26 ↗ we want growth I think one of the things

1:00:28 ↗ you've got to look at where we are today

1:00:29 ↗ and with our commitment to growth as far

1:00:32 ↗ as housing we're almost there so I think

1:00:36 ↗ when we start looking at I'm saying you

1:00:39 ↗ know five-year plan our five-year plan

1:00:41 ↗ with a central area plan shouldn't be

1:00:43 ↗ housing per se it may be mixed use to

1:00:47 ↗ have some but we would need to be

1:00:49 ↗ concentrating on the infrastructure the

1:00:51 ↗ parks the getting the green necklace

1:00:54 ↗ those things implement it because this

1:00:56 ↗ is the only place we have to deal to

1:00:58 ↗ help make the infrastructure for the

1:01:01 ↗ rest of the city so that's why I think

1:01:03 ↗ it's really critical that you

1:01:04 ↗ concentrate first on the city vision and

1:01:06 ↗ seeing based upon where the city is now

1:01:09 ↗ we may want to change the central area

1:01:11 ↗ vision to make sure it includes those so

1:01:15 ↗ we get then in the central area vision

1:01:17 ↗ what we really need long-term it would

1:01:20 ↗ be great if we had the time to do that

1:01:23 ↗ but the charge from the council is to

1:01:26 ↗ only do central and I pulled up a slide

1:01:29 ↗ here can you is it big enough to see but

1:01:35 ↗ this talks about what there it is of

1:01:38 ↗ what generally the vision for Central is

1:01:42 ↗ quo was when we created it then and

1:01:45 ↗ pretty much what it is now it's it's it

1:01:49 ↗ has our regional growth center that we

1:01:51 ↗ applied specifically for to get more

1:01:53 ↗ transit and transportation funding so we

1:01:56 ↗ had to agree to certain growth targets

1:01:58 ↗ in the urban in the regional growth

1:02:00 ↗ center so it is that I mean that's it's

1:02:04 ↗ undeniable it's the balance of jobs and

1:02:07 ↗ housing recreation and entertainment

1:02:08 ↗ opportunities that goes with being urban

1:02:11 ↗ as Joe mentioned it was the new

1:02:12 ↗ direction for the central part of the

1:02:15 ↗ city so that that all the neighborhoods

1:02:17 ↗ on the hillsides could remain intact and

1:02:20 ↗ not have to be more dense sustainable

1:02:23 ↗ development of course has always been a

1:02:24 ↗ big deal to inseok well we've always

1:02:26 ↗ been on the cutting edge of that and the

1:02:28 ↗ other piece that Ken mentioned was that

1:02:31 ↗ you'd be able to get to your daily need

1:02:33 ↗ be urban enough that you'd be able to

1:02:34 ↗ get to your daily needs within walking

1:02:37 ↗ biking or transit that you wouldn't

1:02:39 ↗ always need a car would be very much

1:02:41 ↗ multimodal and we had all sorts of

1:02:44 ↗ projects even and once we hit the

1:02:46 ↗ standards of projects that were needed

1:02:48 ↗ to help create the infrastructure so

1:02:50 ↗ that when the people and all the jobs

1:02:52 ↗ are here that they're able to get around

1:02:53 ↗ and then as Ken mentioned the green

1:02:55 ↗ necklace was the park system and trail

1:02:57 ↗ system that is so important for an urban

1:03:00 ↗ area so that it doesn't feel as urban

1:03:02 ↗ and so this these were sort of the

1:03:04 ↗ building blocks the

1:03:06 ↗ we believe still exists for the purpose

1:03:08 ↗ of Central obviously central Issaquah is

1:03:11 ↗ not going to be a bedroom community it's

1:03:13 ↗ where all the development is supposed to

1:03:15 ↗ go so that the existing neighborhoods on

1:03:18 ↗ the outlier and the rural area - doesn't

1:03:21 ↗ have to be infringed upon so I think

1:03:24 ↗ this is the starting spot we can't go

1:03:27 ↗ back to the full city vision yet until

1:03:30 ↗ we you know annually amend the comp plan

1:03:32 ↗ if we want to do that next year we're

1:03:34 ↗ certainly it's certainly in our power to

1:03:35 ↗ look at that but our charge this month

1:03:39 ↗ and perhaps next month if we can't get

1:03:42 ↗ it done is to revisit the central vision

1:03:45 ↗ yes so I guess I guess rather than I

1:03:49 ↗ made it sound like I want to rework all

1:03:51 ↗ that I'd like to use that to inform all

1:03:53 ↗ of our discussions below that so

1:03:56 ↗ establish what is the city of its akua's

1:03:59 ↗ vision right what is the overall vision

1:04:02 ↗ and then use that to inform our

1:04:04 ↗ discussion about central and all the

1:04:07 ↗ districts make sure that it is always

1:04:10 ↗ aligning with the level above right and

1:04:13 ↗ I would say that center again and maybe

1:04:16 ↗ I maybe I need a translator is the

1:04:18 ↗ purpose of central was to be the growth

1:04:21 ↗ area to take the state targets that we

1:04:24 ↗ were given for jobs and housing so it

1:04:27 ↗ didn't have to go in the rural area and

1:04:29 ↗ it didn't have to go in the existing

1:04:31 ↗ neighborhoods or on the hillsides right

1:04:33 ↗ so that's the function of central right

1:04:35 ↗ but that's the vision of central needs

1:04:38 ↗ to be established in alignment with the

1:04:41 ↗ vision of the city yeah like the word

1:04:44 ↗ the word urban doesn't show up anymore

1:04:46 ↗ earth suburban on that page right those

1:04:49 ↗ are kind of words that yes thank you for

1:04:54 ↗ whoever said that so we try to describe

1:04:57 ↗ what it means so that people don't just

1:04:59 ↗ flinch and say you scare you you know we

1:05:02 ↗ try to describe what does it mean is it

1:05:03 ↗ mid-rise buildings is it blocking - your

1:05:06 ↗ job into your and you know you're in the

1:05:09 ↗ profession it's not scary to you but to

1:05:11 ↗ some folks it's it's a

1:05:14 ↗ wellyou're yes you are okay so this

1:05:19 ↗ counts because I think yes I didn't I

1:05:25 ↗ didn't get my w2 I think I think that

1:05:31 ↗ might be part of the problem because

1:05:32 ↗ when we very at the very beginning were

1:05:34 ↗ kicked off and everyone kind of named

1:05:36 ↗ Jack Atlas in gateway and how terrible

1:05:39 ↗ they were and that's why we need to do

1:05:40 ↗ this but I don't I don't think we're all

1:05:43 ↗ I don't I don't think it's clear what's

1:05:44 ↗ wrong with those because I think part of

1:05:46 ↗ the reason that people freaked out is

1:05:47 ↗ they didn't realize that centralist core

1:05:50 ↗ was going to be transforming from a

1:05:52 ↗ suburban strip mall to an urban core so

1:05:55 ↗ I think I would almost counter argue

1:05:57 ↗ that I think we think we need to be more

1:05:59 ↗ explicit about this if that's the vision

1:06:01 ↗ that's not the vision and we don't need

1:06:02 ↗ that but if they did the vision I think

1:06:04 ↗ we need to lean in that into that right

1:06:06 ↗ and make that very clear so that people

1:06:08 ↗ understand what's coming right and I

1:06:11 ↗ think there was a five-year community

1:06:14 ↗ process to do that and then the the task

1:06:17 ↗ force took another year after that

1:06:19 ↗ before council actually adopted it so it

1:06:22 ↗ was a good six or seven years we worked

1:06:24 ↗ with the community to try to figure out

1:06:26 ↗ what we were going to be what central

1:06:27 ↗ was going to be in the future you know

1:06:29 ↗ we are we looking to change that I'm not

1:06:34 ↗ from scratch are we looking at are we

1:06:35 ↗ lead or refinement because we've already

1:06:37 ↗ applied and received the designation to

1:06:40 ↗ be a regional center to unwind that

1:06:43 ↗ would be I think difficult we could

1:06:46 ↗ unwind it if all of a sudden but that

1:06:48 ↗ would take a lot of so I think no one's

1:06:54 ↗ objecting to the gross sinner

1:06:55 ↗ designation but you can still be a gross

1:06:57 ↗ Center and have a discussion of whether

1:06:59 ↗ that's going to be a suburban form or in

1:07:01 ↗ urban form sure you wouldn't be able to

1:07:04 ↗ get the densities and if you if you make

1:07:07 ↗ it suburban but you could still try to

1:07:10 ↗ do it that way but you could I don't

1:07:12 ↗ think any one one suit but you could

1:07:13 ↗ wear I could make it very clear that

1:07:15 ↗ it's gonna be a car centric parking

1:07:17 ↗ garages and office towers you can do

1:07:18 ↗ that

1:07:19 ↗ knowing one step but because the one one

1:07:21 ↗ said I think we need to be more explicit

1:07:23 ↗ that we are looking to create an urban

1:07:26 ↗ form particular in the center of Central

1:07:30 ↗ School because I think also one of the

1:07:32 ↗ things is tippets valve Ali Pickering

1:07:36 ↗ and maybe some of the other ones the in

1:07:38 ↗ division is to be more urban but for

1:07:40 ↗ some of the other ones it is I would

1:07:43 ↗ argue a more suburban a very walkable

1:07:45 ↗ transit but still very still a very

1:07:47 ↗ suburban form and so I think maybe that

1:07:50 ↗ language doesn't need to be used right

1:07:52 ↗ and we can for each of the districts we

1:07:55 ↗ just haven't gotten there yet okay I

1:07:58 ↗ don't I don't think we should soft-pedal

1:08:01 ↗ the language either I think we should be

1:08:03 ↗ more transparent with it and if it needs

1:08:05 ↗ to be stronger to convey the message to

1:08:08 ↗ the public so that they don't they're

1:08:10 ↗ not shocked when they see the next and

1:08:13 ↗ story building going the next atlas

1:08:16 ↗ because I think people don't trust

1:08:18 ↗ what's happening now with Atlas because

1:08:22 ↗ they caught them off guard

1:08:24 ↗ they sure we approved in the CIP and we

1:08:27 ↗ said this is what we want but then when

1:08:29 ↗ we built it as like oh my gosh what the

1:08:31 ↗ heck's going on in our city were growing

1:08:33 ↗ like crazy and it's one building I think

1:08:36 ↗ we need to be stronger with the language

1:08:38 ↗ and be more upfront with the direction

1:08:41 ↗ of cities going with the growth that

1:08:43 ↗ people are not just on board with it but

1:08:47 ↗ you set the right expectation instead of

1:08:50 ↗ soft-pedaling right I agree all I care

1:08:54 ↗ about is that the central

1:08:56 ↗ Issaquah vision is included with the

1:09:00 ↗ neighborhood visions as an introduction

1:09:03 ↗ to it so that we're not presenting

1:09:05 ↗ orphaned neighborhoods right that they

1:09:09 ↗ are within a larger plan right that's

1:09:12 ↗ all I care about right and just once how

1:09:15 ↗ they exist today but you're right yeah

1:09:17 ↗ one of the comments as far as a little

1:09:19 ↗ bit of feedback as far as with gateway

1:09:22 ↗ and having been on

1:09:23 ↗ we were looking at with the districts as

1:09:25 ↗ have them all be somewhat

1:09:27 ↗ self-sustaining and what's the gateway

1:09:30 ↗ what was the envision there was have

1:09:33 ↗ more mixed-use small retail small

1:09:36 ↗ business and what we got was all

1:09:40 ↗ apartments so they're still dependent

1:09:43 ↗ upon having to get in their car and go

1:09:45 ↗ someplace and so that's not gonna you

1:09:50 ↗ know what we got out of gateway was not

1:09:51 ↗ something that's self-sustaining and

1:09:53 ↗ people can stay there

1:09:54 ↗ nor is it anything it's really

1:09:56 ↗ complementing the existing neighborhoods

1:09:59 ↗ because there's really no room for parks

1:10:01 ↗ and all and there's no really

1:10:03 ↗ identification for it for transit so one

1:10:08 ↗ of the things when we look at the

1:10:09 ↗ districts is I think we also need to

1:10:11 ↗ make sure that the daily needs can be

1:10:14 ↗ done and then it's a sustainable

1:10:16 ↗ development meaning that it's

1:10:19 ↗ self-sufficient and you don't have to

1:10:21 ↗ leave your neighborhood every day to go

1:10:24 ↗ to work necessarily or go to retail so I

1:10:27 ↗ know I think I'm sorry can so I just I'm

1:10:30 ↗ just gonna go ahead and say that we're

1:10:32 ↗ not gonna make a thousand acres of

1:10:35 ↗ self-sustaining neighborhoods it's just

1:10:37 ↗ not gonna happen there's gonna be

1:10:38 ↗ certain parts of central Issaquah that's

1:10:41 ↗ going to be walkable to services so

1:10:43 ↗ Gateway and I don't need you to agree

1:10:46 ↗ with me Mary but my opinion is Gateway

1:10:48 ↗ you most people will get in their cars

1:10:51 ↗ but you have a boardwalk that's gonna

1:10:54 ↗ connect you to hila which then will be

1:10:57 ↗ able to be walkable to the grocery store

1:10:59 ↗ assuming it stays there now it may not

1:11:01 ↗ stay there a train station may take it

1:11:03 ↗ out but you know those are things that

1:11:05 ↗ you know are just gonna happen but you

1:11:07 ↗ know what I can tell you is the market

1:11:10 ↗ for that area for retail is is not there

1:11:14 ↗ it's not gonna be there in 10 years it's

1:11:16 ↗ not gonna be there in 20 years because

1:11:17 ↗ there's not enough vehicular traffic and

1:11:20 ↗ not enough rooftops to support retail in

1:11:22 ↗ that area and so if if we're gonna

1:11:24 ↗ really look at these I think we need to

1:11:27 ↗ be realistic in terms of what the

1:11:29 ↗ appropriate land-use is now and what it

1:11:32 ↗ will be in the foreseeable future during

1:11:35 ↗ this plan ray

1:11:36 ↗ because I think if we expect 1100 acres

1:11:40 ↗ of beige it's just it's not going to be

1:11:44 ↗ that and and we can spend as much time

1:11:46 ↗ on that conversation as we need to so on

1:11:49 ↗ gateway just quickly let me reiterate

1:11:52 ↗ what the past vision was from our prior

1:11:54 ↗ plan because we got just the opposite

1:11:56 ↗ create a signature gateway to Issaquah

1:11:59 ↗ it's a Western Eastern going entryway to

1:12:04 ↗ Issaquah this grand view of the Issaquah

1:12:07 ↗ Alps

1:12:07 ↗ beautiful and the the vision was that

1:12:11 ↗ there might be a little entry sign

1:12:13 ↗ welcome to Issaquah mystical Alps made

1:12:15 ↗ out of stone something that looked

1:12:18 ↗ attractive not apartments right up to

1:12:20 ↗ the edge of i90 create a signature

1:12:23 ↗ gateway that maintains significant open

1:12:25 ↗ space views from i-90 enhanced Tibbets

1:12:28 ↗ Creek Snyder Creek surrounding wetlands

1:12:30 ↗ and buffers while incorporating them

1:12:32 ↗ into the development used natural

1:12:34 ↗ materials such as timber and stone in

1:12:37 ↗ the building and in the design to

1:12:39 ↗ reinforce Pacific Northwest identity

1:12:42 ↗ along with Evergreen emphasis none of

1:12:44 ↗ that on atlas it was similar I'm not I

1:12:48 ↗ wasn't concerned about the height that

1:12:50 ↗ was right with the plan I'm okay with

1:12:51 ↗ the height but when I met with that

1:12:53 ↗ developer before they even got their

1:12:57 ↗ permit to build I told him and it was a

1:13:00 ↗ worse design that I said looked like

1:13:01 ↗ Soviet apartment gulag complex to me it

1:13:05 ↗ was a terrible architectural design and

1:13:09 ↗ they did slightly improve it it's not as

1:13:11 ↗ bad as it was when I saw it but to me I

1:13:14 ↗ said that's the kind of design that made

1:13:17 ↗ me long in Issaquah Highlands as a more

1:13:19 ↗ modern urban style development but that

1:13:22 ↗ doesn't belong down on the flats of

1:13:24 ↗ Issaquah where stone timber that kind of

1:13:28 ↗ thing is more appropriate so those were

1:13:30 ↗ my big problems I've had with those two

1:13:32 ↗ developments so so I think that's why

1:13:34 ↗ we're having this conversation so so

1:13:37 ↗ there was a expectation for Western

1:13:39 ↗ gateway on what we add now is we know

1:13:43 ↗ what we've got in terms of all of it

1:13:46 ↗ except for a couple small parcels

1:13:48 ↗ we have also the addition of most likely

1:13:52 ↗ noise walls from wash dot that are going

1:13:54 ↗ to get built in front of that which will

1:13:56 ↗ again affect that the vision that you

1:13:59 ↗ had about kind of green stepping back to

1:14:01 ↗ Newport it's clearly not going to be

1:14:03 ↗ that so the question I think the bigger

1:14:06 ↗ question for Western gateway is if that

1:14:09 ↗ is a Western gateway for our city in

1:14:11 ↗ terms of eastbound i-94 where's that

1:14:21 ↗ part of the vision that needs to be you

1:14:24 ↗ know erased and that's that's part of

1:14:26 ↗ this conversation right yeah oh why did

1:14:29 ↗ we allow it if it's totally it's totally

1:14:34 ↗ not substandard it's these are these are

1:14:37 ↗ really what decision is and why did we

1:14:41 ↗ even allow it to what what surveilled so

1:14:46 ↗ so part of it is maybe we need to

1:14:51 ↗ further define what it is right so when

1:14:55 ↗ we said we'd if we allowed it is it

1:14:58 ↗ three story basically three story woody

1:15:01 ↗ walk-ups and that's not spectacular or

1:15:03 ↗ even unique is it that it didn't have

1:15:07 ↗ the the green buffer to I 99 so what

1:15:12 ↗ have any of the attributes that that can

1:15:16 ↗ that the vision actually stipulated it's

1:15:19 ↗ there boxes you know covering every

1:15:23 ↗ square inch so if I could one of the one

1:15:26 ↗ of the misconceptions about the city and

1:15:28 ↗ it's something that I recognized real

1:15:30 ↗ well is the CIP is only as good as the

1:15:34 ↗ history you have with it everybody on

1:15:36 ↗ the task force could have looked at the

1:15:38 ↗ development plans and said no no no that

1:15:40 ↗ doesn't fit

1:15:41 ↗ city staff did not put the time and

1:15:43 ↗ energy and anything else into the CIP

1:15:46 ↗ given the amount of work they have they

1:15:49 ↗ they can't they have to go by the

1:15:51 ↗ regulations and the regulations didn't

1:15:54 ↗ include the visions the way that did it

1:15:56 ↗ was all put together very quickly to get

1:15:59 ↗ out and and that's the whole idea of

1:16:01 ↗ going back and starting all over is so

1:16:03 ↗ that the vision and the codes and stuff

1:16:05 ↗ can be put together and that everybody

1:16:07 ↗ is aware of it so next time somebody

1:16:09 ↗ comes in it is it a planner who's only

1:16:12 ↗ been here for six months or two years

1:16:14 ↗ that isn't familiar was the CIP going

1:16:16 ↗ through the code the same well the code

1:16:18 ↗ says you can do this let's do that and

1:16:20 ↗ then the community go wait a minute what

1:16:22 ↗ happened to what all this work we did

1:16:24 ↗ so that's part of getting the public

1:16:27 ↗ involved and getting everybody involved

1:16:28 ↗ so you know what you are actually

1:16:30 ↗ getting so everybody knows it because if

1:16:33 ↗ everybody doesn't know and it's just in

1:16:36 ↗ the code that's all the city has to go

1:16:38 ↗ with for developers which means we have

1:16:40 ↗ to change the code to get to where we

1:16:43 ↗ are and that was reason that's why we

1:16:45 ↗ got gateway that's why we got so so

1:16:50 ↗ before we get to code because codes

1:16:52 ↗ layer three right so what Ken said for

1:16:56 ↗ Western gateway is not what this says

1:16:57 ↗ frankly what this says is create an

1:17:01 ↗ attractive gateway ok so you know what

1:17:03 ↗ that developer says my project is

1:17:05 ↗ attractive ok so attractive is probably

1:17:09 ↗ not the word that we should have used

1:17:12 ↗ here it doesn't convey I think what Ken

1:17:15 ↗ said was the task force's vision for

1:17:18 ↗ this neighborhood

1:17:19 ↗ well too it's a quad that maintains

1:17:23 ↗ significant open space views for my

1:17:26 ↗ ninety ok well I can see Bergsma for my

1:17:29 ↗ ninety that's a significant open space

1:17:31 ↗ view right I mean so all I'm saying is

1:17:33 ↗ the way this is written if you didn't

1:17:37 ↗ have you know five years of taskforce

1:17:40 ↗ time under your belt this is hard to

1:17:44 ↗ implement I think

1:17:48 ↗ yeah I'm not trying to blame I just want

1:17:54 ↗ to say how do we do better right but to

1:17:57 ↗ implement what we really wanted to have

1:17:59 ↗ happen that's like we don't get that the

1:18:02 ↗ problem with gateway is as you said

1:18:04 ↗ that's 20 year old design boxy old

1:18:06 ↗ apartments with outdoor parking that

1:18:09 ↗ covered up a productive wetland for the

1:18:12 ↗ record I didn't say that and we can do

1:18:17 ↗ better it's my point we must do better

1:18:20 ↗ so I'm going to state that at the

1:18:23 ↗ beginning of this district vision

1:18:25 ↗ presentation to City Council that we

1:18:30 ↗ need a statement that answers the

1:18:33 ↗ question of why the previous district

1:18:36 ↗ visions neighborhood visions did not

1:18:38 ↗ achieve our goals and how we can do

1:18:44 ↗ better so a statement such as the

1:18:49 ↗ previous district visions were too

1:18:51 ↗ watered down and did not have a clear

1:18:55 ↗ whatever to describe what needed to be

1:18:59 ↗ and we're not followed up by codes and

1:19:03 ↗ standards to solidify those visions so

1:19:09 ↗ that they were actually implemented so I

1:19:13 ↗ think that is what City Council wants to

1:19:16 ↗ see as the answer to why didn't this

1:19:19 ↗ work before and what are we going to do

1:19:21 ↗ to make it work and so then by seeding

1:19:25 ↗ what didn't work what needs to do and we

1:19:29 ↗ say now we're presenting a clear thing

1:19:31 ↗ but it's up to you to do X Y & Z right

1:19:35 ↗ right and I think you hit the nail on

1:19:37 ↗ the head on why what we give them what

1:19:39 ↗ you give them can't just be the vision

1:19:42 ↗ as all Fiat Talks because that's not

1:19:45 ↗ going to be enough for them they want to

1:19:47 ↗ see how it's going to progress into

1:19:48 ↗ existence because the vision didn't work

1:19:52 ↗ for them last time so as as wonderful as

1:19:55 ↗ a pure vision is I think we need to have

1:19:57 ↗ all the the pieces there for them to be

1:19:59 ↗ comfortable with it and for probably for

1:20:01 ↗ us to be comfortable with it as well can

1:20:04 ↗ we can we start one just for fun because

1:20:07 ↗ we're into our our two we were trying to

1:20:08 ↗ be really good with time so we would be

1:20:10 ↗ here first so late I think the first one

1:20:15 ↗ we picked so Trish yes so what I did was

1:20:21 ↗ I pulled up Minneapolis vision and and

1:20:25 ↗ it says and this is actually a true

1:20:28 ↗ vision statement it says Minneapolis is

1:20:30 ↗ a growing and vibrant world-class city

1:20:32 ↗ with a flourishing and economy and a

1:20:34 ↗ pristine environment where all people

1:20:36 ↗ are safe healthy and have equitable

1:20:39 ↗ opportunities for success and happiness

1:20:41 ↗ and then they've got strategic direction

1:20:44 ↗ the first one is living well so keep

1:20:47 ↗ Minneapolis is safe and livable and has

1:20:49 ↗ an active and connected way of life it

1:20:51 ↗ has one Minneapolis disparities are

1:20:54 ↗ eliminated so all Minneapolis residents

1:20:56 ↗ can partner participate and prosper a

1:20:58 ↗ hub of economic activity and innovation

1:21:02 ↗ businesses big and small start moves

1:21:04 ↗ stay and grow here great places natural

1:21:08 ↗ and built spaces work together and our

1:21:10 ↗ environment is protected and the last

1:21:13 ↗ one is a city that works city government

1:21:15 ↗ runs well and connects to the community

1:21:18 ↗ it serves so if you're looking at vision

1:21:21 ↗ the the reason why things don't work is

1:21:23 ↗ because the vision is not really a

1:21:24 ↗ vision it's a bunch of stuff just thrown

1:21:26 ↗ together right and that's what happened

1:21:28 ↗ so if we want to do this properly we

1:21:30 ↗ need to actually do it as a vision

1:21:32 ↗ statement it's my opinion I disagree and

1:21:35 ↗ I'd say that the existing vision has you

1:21:37 ↗ mentioned jobs we've got environmental

1:21:40 ↗ economic vitality we have transportation

1:21:42 ↗ sense of community is the I think we hit

1:21:46 ↗ a lot of those things because all cities

1:21:48 ↗ have to hit all those things I think

1:21:50 ↗ it's super

1:21:53 ↗ the vision for CIP that the new one that

1:21:55 ↗ we did the new one for cow because

1:21:58 ↗ that's what I pulled up this one these

1:22:02 ↗ the whole thing so you know the the one

1:22:07 ↗ with the picture this one yeah but do we

1:22:11 ↗ pick this one for the whole sub area

1:22:16 ↗ some area it would be how many would be

1:22:22 ↗ in which version was that in the cow

1:22:25 ↗ landed Shore go to land ashore yeah

1:22:39 ↗ no whisper

1:22:46 ↗ don't look too hard at this that might

1:22:48 ↗ make you nauseous oh that's because it

1:22:54 ↗ popped it popped down it does this to be

1:22:56 ↗ redone wait a second

1:22:59 ↗ looking at information out can you

1:23:03 ↗ specifically tell us what exactly we are

1:23:06 ↗ supposed to do today with us this are we

1:23:11 ↗ looking for a 2.0 version of this are we

1:23:14 ↗ looking to optimize this what counsel is

1:23:26 ↗ hoping to get from PPC are a revisiting

1:23:28 ↗ of the vision so that it works better so

1:23:31 ↗ that it's clear so that it gets us the

1:23:34 ↗ community what we want in central

1:23:36 ↗ Issaquah that can be whatever it is that

1:23:39 ↗ you want it to be it could have the

1:23:41 ↗ different steps of long term and short

1:23:43 ↗ term implementation with it it could

1:23:45 ↗ have pictures it can have language with

1:23:49 ↗ primary uses and all of those pieces

1:23:52 ↗ because remember other parts of the

1:23:54 ↗ moratorium work plan are trying to solve

1:23:57 ↗ the other pieces of the frustration of

1:24:00 ↗ like Architectural Review and urban

1:24:03 ↗ design is one of the the moratorium

1:24:05 ↗ items that's going to fixed how you know

1:24:07 ↗ like the part that can read the building

1:24:09 ↗ materials the architectural styles that

1:24:12 ↗ we put in the visions but we didn't

1:24:14 ↗ regulate them so they could build

1:24:16 ↗ anything so some of those other pieces

1:24:18 ↗ are getting corrected in the moratorium

1:24:20 ↗ work plan so the CIP we're really

1:24:22 ↗ looking at a 1.1 revision as opposed to

1:24:25 ↗ a 2.0 revision whatever that is

1:24:29 ↗ don't speak that language he wants to

1:24:31 ↗ know are we are we supposed to create a

1:24:33 ↗ new one from scratch are we supposed to

1:24:35 ↗ take what we have and just kind of

1:24:37 ↗ evolved in you could I would say you

1:24:42 ↗ have to start with the existing

1:24:43 ↗ conditions I mean they're not a vision

1:24:45 ↗ less existing conditions the existing

1:24:47 ↗ document you don't have to start with it

1:24:50 ↗ so we took so I'm gonna now go all the

1:24:53 ↗ way back to 6:35 so you know part of

1:24:58 ↗ this was we spent a bunch of time a

1:25:03 ↗ little bit with you guys but a bunch

1:25:04 ↗ with stakeholders we met with businesses

1:25:08 ↗ from each neighborhood we had a couple

1:25:12 ↗ neighborhood meetings Mary was it one I

1:25:14 ↗ know that we had it atlas and what we

1:25:18 ↗ heard we also tried to evolve it from

1:25:20 ↗ what it was based on what we heard some

1:25:23 ↗ of the criticisms or critiques that we

1:25:26 ↗ heard from the council and so what we

1:25:30 ↗ did was as Trish mentioned earlier there

1:25:33 ↗ were these five kind of topics that

1:25:37 ↗ seemed like it they wanted to be more

1:25:39 ↗ specifically addressed than in the

1:25:41 ↗ previous versions of the neighborhood

1:25:44 ↗ visions so what we did is we updated the

1:25:46 ↗ vision statement at the very top for

1:25:48 ↗ both the sub area and then for each

1:25:50 ↗ neighborhood located within but then we

1:25:53 ↗ we identified some of the existing

1:25:56 ↗ conditions so this middle part which has

1:26:00 ↗ kind of our topical areas you know I

1:26:04 ↗ think it needed to tell a story of what

1:26:08 ↗ we've got today and what we think is

1:26:10 ↗ going to happen because then that

1:26:12 ↗ ultimately led to what we thought was

1:26:14 ↗ the implementing strategies at the end

1:26:16 ↗ and I think this is somewhat in parallel

1:26:19 ↗ to what Lindsay suggested earlier which

1:26:21 ↗ is okay what's your vision and then what

1:26:24 ↗ do you what do you think is going on

1:26:26 ↗ with each of these and then what do you

1:26:29 ↗ need for success and that's what these

1:26:31 ↗ implementing strategies were at the

1:26:33 ↗ bottom and so we did that for each of

1:26:36 ↗ the neighborhoods and I think we

1:26:38 ↗ exploded the council committees brain

1:26:42 ↗ so whether or not this is the right

1:26:44 ↗ structure so there's there's a whole

1:26:46 ↗ conversation about is this the right

1:26:48 ↗ structure and I think we should talk

1:26:51 ↗ about that because this structure is

1:26:53 ↗ very different then I can flip well I

1:26:56 ↗ don't know which of the 12 tabs we have

1:26:58 ↗ open is the old structure but we could

1:27:00 ↗ pick up the old one and say okay here's

1:27:03 ↗ what it used to look like here's what it

1:27:04 ↗ looks like now are we going in the right

1:27:07 ↗ direction just from a structural

1:27:08 ↗ standpoint and then we can talk about

1:27:10 ↗ the actual meat that's on the bones and

1:27:13 ↗ did we get that right is it not right

1:27:15 ↗ when we start to talk about some of

1:27:17 ↗ these you know in terms of unpacking the

1:27:21 ↗ green necklace within each neighborhood

1:27:22 ↗ you know Ken and I talked a little bit

1:27:24 ↗ earlier about you know the green

1:27:25 ↗ necklace has been on the table for a

1:27:27 ↗ long time now and it's really a lot of

1:27:30 ↗ people say I don't know what that is I

1:27:31 ↗ don't know what that means and that part

1:27:33 ↗ needs to get unpacked and part of it's

1:27:35 ↗ happening through the park plan that's

1:27:38 ↗ going through right now with the parks

1:27:39 ↗ department but this is so this is what

1:27:43 ↗ this looks like I think we were kind of

1:27:45 ↗ nibbling around the edges so here's kind

1:27:47 ↗ of a peek behind the curtain but you

1:27:49 ↗ know here's the vision for the sub area

1:27:51 ↗ and you know whether you want to start

1:27:55 ↗ kind of wordsmithing this where do you

1:27:58 ↗ think this is you know I don't want to

1:28:00 ↗ start talking about Minneapolis although

1:28:02 ↗ I appreciate you know the access to the

1:28:05 ↗ Internet we have it was an example so

1:28:09 ↗ they've clearly done a lot of work to

1:28:11 ↗ get to that place sure that was just an

1:28:13 ↗ example well and there was a lot of work

1:28:15 ↗ I think to get to this place now whether

1:28:16 ↗ this is still right or not

1:28:19 ↗ I think we need to have that kind of

1:28:21 ↗ conversation

1:28:23 ↗ but I think that you know I think if

1:28:27 ↗ again we were trying to kind of give you

1:28:29 ↗ guys kind of free rein to have

1:28:31 ↗ conversations about this the way you

1:28:32 ↗ wanted it to but it seems like we kind

1:28:36 ↗ of have fooled around in a circle a bit

1:28:37 ↗ and maybe we need to actually dig into

1:28:39 ↗ some concrete examples to see you know

1:28:42 ↗ what do we think you know it's actually

1:28:44 ↗ I thought knock them down as far as

1:28:47 ↗ getting this thing done

1:28:50 ↗ and wanted to meet I think it's very hot

1:28:52 ↗ for a tional this is almost a taskforce

1:28:53 ↗ this is almost a committee that needs to

1:28:57 ↗ sit down and dive into this multiple

1:29:00 ↗ sessions and tear it apart and create a

1:29:04 ↗ $2 document this is not something we can

1:29:06 ↗ do in two nights we might be able to do

1:29:13 ↗ something with it that takes it forward

1:29:15 ↗ and I would suggest instead of going

1:29:18 ↗ into any of the individual neighborhoods

1:29:22 ↗ is just to take a look at the type of

1:29:25 ↗ information that's there and say is

1:29:28 ↗ something missing and do are we

1:29:34 ↗ conveying our needs with the function of

1:29:37 ↗ that document and the type of content

1:29:39 ↗ that is there before going into words

1:29:43 ↗ nothing I think we need to understand it

1:29:47 ↗ we're not there we're nowhere there well

1:29:51 ↗ so I think we three would say we

1:29:54 ↗ understand it because we spend a couple

1:29:56 ↗ years on it and personally I'm

1:29:59 ↗ comfortable with what's documented I

1:30:01 ↗ think although some of it appears to

1:30:02 ↗ have changed and I'm not maybe

1:30:04 ↗ up-to-date but for me the biggest thing

1:30:08 ↗ I think needs to happen is to tell the

1:30:10 ↗ council that the vision and we can go

1:30:14 ↗ through it all maybe that's what we need

1:30:15 ↗ to do is just look at it but assuming

1:30:18 ↗ and I think it's still good that the

1:30:20 ↗ vision is good the biggest message is to

1:30:24 ↗ make the vision a reality you got to

1:30:26 ↗ have the backup to make it implementable

1:30:28 ↗ which means codes regulations policies

1:30:32 ↗ and enforcement and then you've got to

1:30:34 ↗ have the staff educated enough so when a

1:30:37 ↗ developer comes in and it says this is

1:30:40 ↗ what I want to do they say no that's not

1:30:41 ↗ in keeping with our vision here's here's

1:30:44 ↗ what that says and oh by the way this is

1:30:46 ↗ what our code says so you can't do what

1:30:48 ↗ you would like to do like you did in

1:30:50 ↗ Renton because this is this a quad we do

1:30:52 ↗ it different here and we let things

1:30:55 ↗ develop the way we want them to go

1:30:58 ↗ not the way someone tells us they want

1:31:00 ↗ to do it that's what we've got to get to

1:31:02 ↗ and there's got to be rules code policy

1:31:06 ↗ behind it to make it implementable or

1:31:09 ↗ it's just an aspirational vision that

1:31:11 ↗ someone can legally say I'm not doing it

1:31:15 ↗ and we won't be able to do anything

1:31:17 ↗ about that

1:31:18 ↗ I mean I think I think all of this is

1:31:24 ↗ probably pretty good still I know we we

1:31:28 ↗ felt really good when it was done

1:31:31 ↗ [Music]

1:31:33 ↗ everybody kind of knows where we want to

1:31:38 ↗ go the moratorium is over at the end of

1:31:42 ↗ December when you think about that do

1:31:46 ↗ you want to have something in place by

1:31:49 ↗ the end of December or do you just want

1:31:52 ↗ to spend another 15 meetings deciding

1:31:55 ↗ how to write the vision what words to

1:31:58 ↗ put in it and have builders go in and

1:32:00 ↗ build whatever they want what is the

1:32:02 ↗ decision here so so can I add this can I

1:32:06 ↗ see something about that so visions

1:32:08 ↗ don't change right they're not supposed

1:32:11 ↗ to change so they can go up to 20 years

1:32:13 ↗ it's code that so you have to make it

1:32:16 ↗ big enough that you can adjust your code

1:32:19 ↗ as you go but it's it's it doesn't

1:32:22 ↗ change the vision the vision has to

1:32:24 ↗ always remain the same and and and I

1:32:27 ↗ feel like we're confusing those those

1:32:29 ↗ two things the code and all the

1:32:31 ↗ implementation stuff can't change as

1:32:34 ↗ long as it's in it's consistent with the

1:32:37 ↗ vision but the vision is what the

1:32:39 ↗ picture what we think is the question

1:32:41 ↗ look like absolutely and and how we

1:32:44 ↗ evolve that with the code is fine but

1:32:47 ↗ saying that the that we have to have a

1:32:51 ↗ vision in place because of code stuff is

1:32:54 ↗ is activies very short-sighted right but

1:32:58 ↗ I think so I don't disagree but here we

1:33:01 ↗ have eleven visions right we don't just

1:33:03 ↗ have one vision we have a vision for the

1:33:05 ↗ sub area but then we have

1:33:07 ↗ and sub visions and I think and I think

1:33:11 ↗ what we're being asked to look at is one

1:33:16 ↗ is this vision for the sub area still

1:33:19 ↗ okay and I agree with you out Thea it's

1:33:21 ↗ I mean it's been five years four years

1:33:24 ↗ seven years six years somewhere in there

1:33:27 ↗ six seven simple somewhere between four

1:33:32 ↗ and seven

1:33:34 ↗ you know I that's a short amount of time

1:33:38 ↗ this is a thirty year plan you know four

1:33:40 ↗ to seven years is short period of time

1:33:42 ↗ so you know I think we can look at this

1:33:44 ↗ vision and say you know is anything

1:33:46 ↗ changed is there any reason why this is

1:33:48 ↗ not what central Issaquah is or should

1:33:51 ↗ be thirty years from now that should be

1:33:53 ↗ a fairly quick conversation because

1:33:55 ↗ that's really high level that's that's

1:33:57 ↗ like two hundred thousand feet but then

1:33:58 ↗ we're gonna dive down to fifty thousand

1:34:00 ↗ feet and look at each neighborhood and

1:34:02 ↗ say okay now based on that list that put

1:34:05 ↗ up earlier about what has changed in the

1:34:07 ↗ last number of years you know is the

1:34:11 ↗ vision changed for that neighborhood you

1:34:13 ↗ know I think Western gateway is going to

1:34:15 ↗ be the one we talked about the most

1:34:16 ↗ because so much of it is just an end

1:34:20 ↗ lost might be the right word I'm not

1:34:23 ↗ going on record to saying that either

1:34:24 ↗ you know but it's it's not turning out

1:34:27 ↗ the way that it was envisioned and so

1:34:29 ↗ that's that's a that's a conundrum that

1:34:31 ↗ I think we have to deal with here

1:34:33 ↗ because it would be hard for me to say

1:34:35 ↗ we should leave the vision for Western

1:34:36 ↗ gateway the same if we know we're not

1:34:38 ↗ going to get there and that's I think

1:34:40 ↗ where the council got kind of hung up so

1:34:45 ↗ let's start here this is our safest

1:34:49 ↗ space because it's our highest space so

1:34:52 ↗ again let's talk about construct first

1:34:56 ↗ before we get into the words so the

1:34:57 ↗ construct is vision summary at the top

1:35:00 ↗ which tells you where we think we want

1:35:02 ↗ to be or where we want to go so this

1:35:04 ↗ should be this should be the here's

1:35:06 ↗ where we want to be a long ways from now

1:35:08 ↗ for this area these individual subtopics

1:35:13 ↗ are meant to really pull out some

1:35:18 ↗ understanding because you know five

1:35:20 ↗ years from

1:35:21 ↗ when people say well why did this

1:35:24 ↗ neighborhood turn out the way it did you

1:35:27 ↗ know I think one of the things that we

1:35:28 ↗ felt pretty strongly about like for

1:35:31 ↗ example on mobility and connections its

1:35:33 ↗ regional traffic's a big deal it you

1:35:35 ↗ know we talked about it and on the tour

1:35:37 ↗ last night as we sat on East Lake

1:35:39 ↗ Sammamish moving very slowly even for me

1:35:44 ↗ and so you know so that's a reality and

1:35:48 ↗ that's that's something that's more

1:35:50 ↗ significant to this community now than

1:35:52 ↗ five years ago when this plan was put

1:35:54 ↗ together I think it was there but it was

1:35:57 ↗ maybe a little bit more subliminal than

1:36:00 ↗ it is now so it seemed like as we talked

1:36:03 ↗ about you know mobility and connections

1:36:06 ↗ what's the problem what's what's the

1:36:08 ↗ challenges facing central Issaquah you

1:36:11 ↗ know and and what's coming in terms of

1:36:13 ↗ we know there's a transit station coming

1:36:16 ↗ in 2041 and we know in 2026 we need to

1:36:20 ↗ start planning for where that's going

1:36:23 ↗ and so Okies before diving into mobility

1:36:27 ↗ and connections you asked does this

1:36:30 ↗ format meet the needs yes and I would

1:36:34 ↗ say the problem I have with how it is

1:36:38 ↗ right now is the verb tense differs

1:36:42 ↗ between is and will be yes and so I

1:36:46 ↗ would create I would either create two

1:36:51 ↗ sections under primary uses in

1:36:52 ↗ architectural style in each of the areas

1:36:54 ↗ that says current vision and do that or

1:36:58 ↗ I would standardize on one or the other

1:37:00 ↗ depending on what our needs are that's a

1:37:03 ↗ great comment

1:37:04 ↗ we knew that we knew that problem

1:37:06 ↗ existed thank you though

1:37:09 ↗ and then ultimately from here getting

1:37:11 ↗ down to the bottom and then in terms of

1:37:13 ↗ structure so those kind of five

1:37:15 ↗ categories we're going to try to kind of

1:37:18 ↗ cover all everything in those five I'm

1:37:20 ↗ wondering how those align or overlap

1:37:23 ↗ with the guiding principles from the

1:37:26 ↗ currently adopted centralist quoi plan

1:37:29 ↗ witches environment housing sense of

1:37:32 ↗ community transportation and other

1:37:35 ↗ essential services economic vitality and

1:37:38 ↗ innovation so I don't I don't know how

1:37:41 ↗ those categories because those

1:37:42 ↗ categories are also used in the current

1:37:46 ↗ central Issaquah plan but kind of in a

1:37:48 ↗ different way I just want to make sure

1:37:51 ↗ that we're and it says that these

1:37:53 ↗ guiding principles were established by

1:37:55 ↗ the community so I want to continue to

1:37:57 ↗ use whatever is so let me go back to so

1:38:03 ↗ so John if you look at so here's what's

1:38:05 ↗ in the plan right now right alright so

1:38:07 ↗ what's in the plan right now is there's

1:38:09 ↗ here's our vision statements so again

1:38:11 ↗ pretty small so you know just from a

1:38:14 ↗ scope perspective you know we we fit two

1:38:17 ↗ neighborhoods on a page you know we have

1:38:20 ↗ primary uses we had key environment and

1:38:23 ↗ then mobility connections and we went

1:38:25 ↗ from there so we felt like we've kind of

1:38:27 ↗ unpacked it because you know environment

1:38:31 ↗ and green necklace although they're

1:38:33 ↗ interconnected they're very different

1:38:35 ↗ things

1:38:36 ↗ and placemaking was really not part of

1:38:40 ↗ the original construct but as we talked

1:38:43 ↗ to people in each neighborhood and our

1:38:47 ↗ friend from the Grange is here thank you

1:38:49 ↗ again John you know it became clear that

1:38:51 ↗ you know whether their businesses or

1:38:54 ↗ residents or visitor's in each area had

1:38:58 ↗ this like idea that hey there should be

1:38:59 ↗ something cool about our area something

1:39:01 ↗ distinct and something that's memorable

1:39:03 ↗ and so we felt like adding placemaking

1:39:06 ↗ if if we're gonna still have ten and I

1:39:08 ↗ think that's still a question for me

1:39:11 ↗ it's still a question for me Joan sorry

1:39:14 ↗ you know is there is there a place in

1:39:17 ↗ each neighborhood that you know is a is

1:39:20 ↗ memorable and I don't know we'll we'll

1:39:23 ↗ talk about that later so so I don't know

1:39:26 ↗ if I I don't know if that was a good

1:39:27 ↗ answer I think it actually is consistent

1:39:30 ↗ but is a little bit more

1:39:33 ↗ unpacked than the previous version I

1:39:35 ↗ think one of the areas that John

1:39:37 ↗ mentioned that was in whatever other

1:39:40 ↗ plan that is is economic development

1:39:43 ↗ which I'm not economic vitality yes I

1:39:48 ↗ understand

1:39:49 ↗ lace-making and architectural style

1:39:52 ↗ maybe that fits into either of those do

1:39:55 ↗ we feel like it does the guiding

1:40:09 ↗ principles that John was reading are the

1:40:11 ↗ overarching for all of central knowing

1:40:13 ↗ that if we're going to be the jobs

1:40:14 ↗ housing spot for the next 20 to 30 years

1:40:17 ↗ we would have to make sure that economic

1:40:19 ↗ vitality worked so it wasn't just

1:40:22 ↗ cranking out jobs or just cranking out

1:40:24 ↗ that we had to have a balance and it had

1:40:26 ↗ to keep our sense of place and the

1:40:28 ↗ environment as a right feeling so if

1:40:31 ↗ we're talking about these individual

1:40:33 ↗ neighborhoods we have to understand

1:40:36 ↗ whether the neighborhood is more

1:40:40 ↗ business ok

1:40:46 ↗ but I think that so I guess I have a

1:40:49 ↗ very broad definition of economic

1:40:51 ↗ vitality I guess I think if we do these

1:40:53 ↗ things right they will be economically

1:40:55 ↗ vital and you know especially if you if

1:40:59 ↗ you create a place you know that people

1:41:03 ↗ want to be then businesses will want to

1:41:05 ↗ be there it will have you know activity

1:41:08 ↗ and that's pretty much definition of

1:41:12 ↗ economic vitality right because then

1:41:13 ↗ businesses will want to be there people

1:41:16 ↗ want to live there success okay where

1:41:27 ↗ are we are you guys ready to go one

1:41:30 ↗ layer down at 8:20 and I throw out one

1:41:35 ↗ thing just as a comment for the for the

1:41:37 ↗ vision I think one of my piece of

1:41:38 ↗ feedback is the the spiel that I had a

1:41:41 ↗ little bit earlier about timeline

1:41:43 ↗ I think it might be able to throw a

1:41:44 ↗ reference to that in terms of the visual

1:41:47 ↗ is that sure I think at this level so at

1:41:51 ↗ the at the two hundred thousand foot

1:41:53 ↗ level you know if there wants to be I

1:41:57 ↗ don't know if we want to call it a

1:41:59 ↗ mission or if there's something that we

1:42:01 ↗ want to add that's at this level but not

1:42:04 ↗ at the neighborhood level yeah I think

1:42:07 ↗ even within the context of this vision I

1:42:09 ↗ think I have thrown in a sentence

1:42:11 ↗ somewhere this is something about how

1:42:12 ↗ like the vision is to invest so that the

1:42:16 ↗ growth will come but the stresses I

1:42:19 ↗ don't know I don't wanna do any

1:42:20 ↗ wordsmith you now but something along

1:42:21 ↗ those lines to make clear at the very

1:42:23 ↗ beginning that this is a we're trying to

1:42:25 ↗ tear ourselves up for growth not it grow

1:42:28 ↗ because those those are slightly

1:42:29 ↗ different things okay that's all just

1:42:32 ↗ one two three that off before yeah I I

1:42:33 ↗ think I think that's that's an okay I

1:42:37 ↗ think you know to kind of run statement

1:42:40 ↗ earlier and I think Lindsay was on that

1:42:42 ↗ page as well to put something in here

1:42:44 ↗ that describes why we went from vision

1:42:48 ↗ 1.0 to 1.1 I think that is great because

1:42:52 ↗ three years from now somebody will

1:42:55 ↗ wonder why there was two versions of

1:42:56 ↗ this thing right because we'll all

1:42:58 ↗ forget it because some of us are old

1:43:00 ↗ forget things okay one more on the yet

1:43:05 ↗ big picture level is what I mentioned to

1:43:07 ↗ you earlier I'm a little surprised that

1:43:09 ↗ after all this time there still isn't a

1:43:11 ↗ plan or a route defined for what this

1:43:14 ↗ green necklace is there key elements of

1:43:16 ↗ it already in place the reindeer trail

1:43:19 ↗ the maple juniper trail Tibbits Valley

1:43:23 ↗ Park Lake Sammamish State Park I was I

1:43:29 ↗ was gonna make it similar comment I

1:43:30 ↗ think it would be great that if we're

1:43:32 ↗ gonna have a standalone page for each

1:43:33 ↗ neighborhood to have a standalone page

1:43:35 ↗ for the green necklace absolutely and

1:43:38 ↗ it's got to be defined now down to the

1:43:41 ↗ parcel and Route level or it'll never

1:43:44 ↗ it's got it you got to know if this

1:43:48 ↗ parcel gets developed we've got to have

1:43:50 ↗ a trail core it's I think that's that

1:43:53 ↗ would be the the long-term plan for the

1:43:55 ↗ part for the park departments I don't

1:43:56 ↗ think you want to get that granular but

1:43:58 ↗ I do think having an aspirational sketch

1:44:01 ↗ would be would be very helpful for the

1:44:04 ↗ purpose of making sense where are the

1:44:07 ↗ gaps and what are we gonna do to close

1:44:09 ↗ those gaps now otherwise it's not going

1:44:11 ↗ to happen

1:44:12 ↗ so that that needs to happen at the

1:44:15 ↗ large level the whole level because each

1:44:17 ↗ neighborhood refers to the necklace and

1:44:20 ↗ their particular piece but nowhere does

1:44:22 ↗ that whole necklace come together

1:44:23 ↗ tonight because I see the point the

1:44:25 ↗ point of the necklace is it as much to

1:44:26 ↗ navigate within the neighborhood just to

1:44:28 ↗ navigate between the neighborhoods

1:44:29 ↗ that's fast so so in the implementation

1:44:32 ↗ strategies at the sub area level and I'm

1:44:37 ↗ gonna guess with you this is woefully

1:44:39 ↗ inadequate based on what I and so I

1:44:43 ↗ think I think we're we're down to is yes

1:44:46 ↗ this should be an implementation of the

1:44:49 ↗ sub area plan of central Issaquah is to

1:44:55 ↗ Keith Keith I think you I think we have

1:44:57 ↗ the map if you look at not these pages

1:45:00 ↗ but yeah the printouts you have these

1:45:02 ↗ vague voting lines yes not the bubbles

1:45:06 ↗ but you've got green shaded lines I

1:45:08 ↗ think that's great I think I think I

1:45:10 ↗ would agree I think a bigger map of

1:45:12 ↗ those and then saying this is what we

1:45:16 ↗ have this is our intention here are the

1:45:18 ↗ gaps any of it even if the intention is

1:45:20 ↗ this very vaguely defined green

1:45:22 ↗ Photoshop I think that's I think that's

1:45:25 ↗ great I don't we need to have that first

1:45:28 ↗ yes and then we can then figure out what

1:45:30 ↗ parcels need be fill in but that's

1:45:31 ↗ that's not that's not vision making them

1:45:33 ↗ actually blocking that while you're

1:45:35 ↗ right at the vision level we need that I

1:45:38 ↗ want to get to the tactical level or it

1:45:40 ↗ won't have

1:45:40 ↗ and it isn't just the green necklace

1:45:41 ↗ it's then how do we connect the green

1:45:44 ↗ necklace to these Lake Sammamish Trail

1:45:46 ↗ the i-90 trail the Issaquah to preston

1:45:48 ↗ trail to Tiger Mountain to Spock

1:45:49 ↗ Mountain to Cougar we have all of that

1:45:52 ↗ defined or it's just not going to have

1:45:54 ↗ it totally but I think for the purposes

1:45:55 ↗ of vision you would just have bullet

1:45:56 ↗ points that say this needs to be

1:45:57 ↗ connected to this discipline is my point

1:45:59 ↗ being we can't just leave it at the

1:46:02 ↗ vision level it's got to get documented

1:46:04 ↗ quickly or we'll never make it happen I

1:46:07 ↗ yeah I don't I don't disagree I'm just

1:46:09 ↗ saying that's that sounds a lot like Oh

1:46:10 ↗ without an a requirements checklist

1:46:12 ↗ something that says here are the things

1:46:15 ↗ that the vision that need to happen for

1:46:18 ↗ the vision to be successful see you add

1:46:21 ↗ that those were the two I had the codes

1:46:23 ↗ of regulations of policies and then a

1:46:26 ↗ detailed layout of the green necklace

1:46:28 ↗ those are the two things I think are

1:46:30 ↗ absolutely essential to make this happen

1:46:33 ↗ success yeah I know I agree with that

1:46:35 ↗ okay yes we are okay

1:46:45 ↗ might I suggest that if we're going to

1:46:47 ↗ start with a neighborhood we start with

1:46:48 ↗ Pickering that seems to be the most

1:46:50 ↗ solidified that may be the easiest to

1:46:53 ↗ start with all right so the vision for

1:46:58 ↗ Pickering neighborhood is as a mixed use

1:47:01 ↗ neighborhood anchored by Costco's

1:47:02 ↗ international headquarters Pickering

1:47:04 ↗ farm and convenient access to the south

1:47:07 ↗ side of i-90 from new vehicular crossing

1:47:10 ↗ Issaquah Creek runs along the eastern

1:47:13 ↗ boundary of this neighborhood and serves

1:47:15 ↗ as a backdrop for Pickering trail that

1:47:18 ↗ connects to Lake Sammamish State Park as

1:47:21 ↗ well as Lake Sammamish regional trail in

1:47:24 ↗ addition convenient access to the new

1:47:27 ↗ Sound Transit light rail station will be

1:47:29 ↗ a significant catalyst for this

1:47:31 ↗ neighborhood there is a mix of vision

1:47:35 ↗ and current in there that makes it a bit

1:47:38 ↗ confusing yes yes so may I think maybe

1:47:42 ↗ tactically do the same thing that

1:47:44 ↗ Lyndsey suggested for the columns for

1:47:46 ↗ the vision have a

1:47:47 ↗ and a vision and just peel them apart

1:47:56 ↗ okay so besides kind of current and

1:48:07 ↗ future and so we can reconstruct that I

1:48:11 ↗ believe that's not and then it might be

1:48:13 ↗ helpful dad the new roads since that's

1:48:17 ↗ happening on the map or the point of the

1:48:20 ↗ map to show the current I think that

1:48:27 ↗ since those are since those are in

1:48:29 ↗ flight is this yes should we be should

1:48:35 ↗ we be critiquing this map not Batman so

1:48:41 ↗ when we're talking about the vision we

1:48:43 ↗ say yes Costco is there and there is

1:48:48 ↗ access but what is it going to be right

1:48:53 ↗ so I think I mean so right now what you

1:48:57 ↗ have is Costco takes a kind of this much

1:49:02 ↗ of the geography of this neighborhood

1:49:05 ↗ this is critical area along the east

1:49:07 ↗ side and you have basically a

1:49:11 ↗ single-story surface part retail for the

1:49:15 ↗ balance of the neighborhood you know as

1:49:19 ↗ we sat there and talked about this last

1:49:21 ↗ night you know the things that are

1:49:23 ↗ changing here as you guys talked about

1:49:25 ↗ there's a new road here at the East End

1:49:30 ↗ there's also likely going to be another

1:49:32 ↗ crossing that will connect this

1:49:35 ↗ neighborhood to Tibbets most likely

1:49:39 ↗ depending on how far east that crossing

1:49:42 ↗ happens you know the train station

1:49:46 ↗ whether it's on the south side or the

1:49:49 ↗ north side or in the right away it will

1:49:54 ↗ connect to both of these sides of the

1:49:57 ↗ freeway you will be able to get there

1:49:58 ↗ from there

1:50:00 ↗ can I ask why Pickering is a distinct

1:50:03 ↗ neighborhood from Tibbets Valley because

1:50:08 ↗ they're divided by a giant freeway but

1:50:10 ↗ if the vision is to bridge that divide

1:50:12 ↗ and we're gonna have a train station

1:50:15 ↗ that is for all intents and purposes in

1:50:17 ↗ the right-of-way the train station

1:50:19 ↗ should be at the center it could be if

1:50:22 ↗ the train station goes in the end I knew

1:50:25 ↗ right away which in my opinion I think

1:50:28 ↗ is both the most likely and I think the

1:50:29 ↗ most preferable why why don't we have a

1:50:33 ↗ vision that the Tibbets Valley and the

1:50:36 ↗ bickering neighborhoods become a single

1:50:39 ↗ urban neighborhood that yes there's a

1:50:41 ↗ freeway in the middle of it but you know

1:50:43 ↗ there's there's there's a freeway in the

1:50:44 ↗ middle of other downtown's and you're

1:50:46 ↗ able to bridge that it's not obviously

1:50:48 ↗ not preferred but could we have a we

1:50:51 ↗ have a vision that we that we stitch

1:50:53 ↗ these two neighborhoods together and

1:50:54 ↗ that the intent is they have a single

1:50:56 ↗ identity that's bridged I mean you can

1:50:59 ↗ you can easily build a beautiful light

1:51:02 ↗ rail station that makes it very easy for

1:51:03 ↗ people to move between the neighborhood

1:51:05 ↗ to have a common identity okay that's a

1:51:11 ↗ great suggestion and there are those the

1:51:14 ↗ two just for the neighborhoods districts

1:51:16 ↗ that have urban hub or yes I took a

1:51:22 ↗ zoning map I'm not sure who stole it

1:51:26 ↗ babbles I mean they would meet the urban

1:51:31 ↗ core the urban core is already so saying

1:51:38 ↗ something like our goal is for more

1:51:41 ↗ connectivity gained by having this light

1:51:45 ↗ rail and what a buildup in the other

1:51:50 ↗ areas what you think your social

1:51:52 ↗ initiative this just be one one district

1:51:55 ↗ because the question is do you want to

1:51:56 ↗ do it's not now but the vision is that

1:52:00 ↗ would become assumed because do you want

1:52:01 ↗ when you when you redevelop those

1:52:03 ↗ shopping centers that are on the south

1:52:04 ↗ side of the retaining pond do you want

1:52:06 ↗ those buildings facing the pond and

1:52:08 ↗ facing Costco or do you want them facing

1:52:10 ↗ the light rail station in my opinion I

1:52:13 ↗ think the vision is that the new

1:52:15 ↗ development in the western south western

1:52:18 ↗ half of Pickering should be facing I 90

1:52:21 ↗ same as the development and Tippett's

1:52:24 ↗ Valley should be facing AIA 90 since the

1:52:26 ↗ I think the light rail station will be

1:52:28 ↗ you cannot get more placemaking than

1:52:31 ↗ eleven eleven all rail station and so I

1:52:34 ↗ think if you have it as a single

1:52:36 ↗ neighborhood it needs to be stitched

1:52:39 ↗ together right now it's two

1:52:40 ↗ neighborhoods but the vision is that

1:52:41 ↗ it's a single neighborhood that's tied

1:52:43 ↗ together with with with the transit

1:52:45 ↗ station with at least one Road bridge

1:52:47 ↗ potentially an additional pedestrian

1:52:49 ↗ bridge and in you and you see in and

1:52:52 ↗ then the vision is to stitch together as

1:52:53 ↗ a single urban core that's been

1:52:56 ↗ surrounded by urban but not as dense

1:52:59 ↗ other neighborhoods that make up the

1:53:02 ↗ rest of Central Oklahoma so in in terms

1:53:07 ↗ of so what what are you trying to create

1:53:08 ↗ that is the vision everything I'm

1:53:12 ↗ hearing it seems more about how you

1:53:14 ↗ gonna get there and so the question is

1:53:16 ↗ so when you see it would you see it was

1:53:19 ↗ my vision it is it is

1:53:24 ↗ it's not a neighborhood yeah there's

1:53:26 ↗ urban core and there's outside the core

1:53:27 ↗ yes so what would you want to be able to

1:53:31 ↗ do or what would you want that the

1:53:33 ↗ flavor of that region to be you can live

1:53:36 ↗ work and play without it's not it's not

1:53:42 ↗ how you know what what pieces you're

1:53:44 ↗ gonna put in there what right whatever

1:53:46 ↗ and I get that but I think I think the

1:53:47 ↗ vision can be just as explicit as the

1:53:50 ↗ two neighborhood should become a single

1:53:52 ↗ neighborhood from a place making and

1:53:54 ↗ from a navigability standpoint well I

1:53:59 ↗ think the whole idea that the cinnabar

1:54:03 ↗ Barnes and Noble Big Lots then being

1:54:06 ↗ there in 30 years is pretty unlikely for

1:54:09 ↗ sure the vision might include and it

1:54:11 ↗ talks about housing but dynamic urban

1:54:15 ↗ multi-use multi-level retail housing

1:54:19 ↗ combination to create a thriving

1:54:22 ↗ neighborhood focused around the Transit

1:54:24 ↗ Center that bridges the gap between the

1:54:27 ↗ two neighborhoods on both sides of i90

1:54:30 ↗ something like that yeah is what popped

1:54:32 ↗ into my head because you want to make

1:54:33 ↗ sure the code is structured so that when

1:54:34 ↗ someone puts in a building they don't

1:54:37 ↗ orient it so the building is just trying

1:54:39 ↗ to get to the Sammamish Parkway to get

1:54:41 ↗ onto 90 right you want it to be facing

1:54:42 ↗ the freeway so that it's there so that

1:54:45 ↗ when the bridges and the hydro station

1:54:47 ↗ come that's four I mean I was just in

1:54:52 ↗ Hong Kong and it's fascinating that

1:54:53 ↗ every one of their train stops are real

1:54:56 ↗ there some way if you want to call it

1:54:58 ↗ that has all kinds of multi-level retail

1:55:02 ↗ and hotels and giant condos multi 80

1:55:06 ↗ stories high but also fantastic urban

1:55:10 ↗ parks built into all of that and they're

1:55:13 ↗ a perfect example of how to do it right

1:55:16 ↗ we need to follow that would it be a

1:55:19 ↗ fool to have something in the vision

1:55:22 ↗ that say that the code should be

1:55:24 ↗ structured to anticipate future transit

1:55:27 ↗ and be willing to tour that cuz I don't

1:55:30 ↗ because is that does that mention now I

1:55:32 ↗ mean cuz week is one because when this

1:55:34 ↗ was originally developed we didn't know

1:55:36 ↗ we're gonna light rail station right now

1:55:37 ↗ we are yep do we would to presuppose

1:55:39 ↗ roughly where that is and articulate

1:55:42 ↗ that that the code should anticipate I

1:55:44 ↗ think that's a great idea I was gonna

1:55:47 ↗ suggest the same things when this was

1:55:48 ↗ developed we didn't have st3 and we do

1:55:52 ↗ now so why don't you shut it now yes and

1:55:55 ↗ you're talking about making a focal

1:55:57 ↗ point that's almost you know like

1:55:58 ↗ monumental to them and they make it very

1:56:00 ↗ clear that that the division is that the

1:56:04 ↗ level station will be the focal point of

1:56:06 ↗ this of this neighborhood but the light

1:56:09 ↗ rail station

1:56:09 ↗ we won't know what's created create a

1:56:17 ↗ vision for because I think and I mean

1:56:19 ↗ it's combat as staff before I think the

1:56:20 ↗ city can make a decision of where the

1:56:23 ↗ light rail station is now and plan

1:56:25 ↗ accordingly because Sound Transit will

1:56:28 ↗ more or less put the station where the

1:56:30 ↗ city wants it with and we think the

1:56:33 ↗ economics make the most sense yeah but

1:56:36 ↗ yeah but the city's refer from from

1:56:38 ↗ house and transit works they very much

1:56:40 ↗ defer to the city's in terms of station

1:56:43 ↗ placement has

1:56:44 ↗ Sound Transit talked about an initial

1:56:46 ↗ stage station placement or any kind of

1:56:48 ↗ study your timeline so that so the Wow I

1:56:53 ↗ wants a preferred there so that I think

1:56:55 ↗ there's some words that I don't know

1:56:57 ↗ because it was Monday when I last heard

1:57:00 ↗ them so so that representative alignment

1:57:04 ↗ about that thank you

1:57:06 ↗ my gosh thank you son so the

1:57:08 ↗ representative alignment actually showed

1:57:11 ↗ the train station kind of on the south

1:57:14 ↗ side of the freeway kind of cutting into

1:57:16 ↗ the meadows which then freaked out all

1:57:19 ↗ the shop owners in the meadows so you

1:57:23 ↗ know I think the city has a much better

1:57:25 ↗ I'll just go ahead and share so right

1:57:29 ↗ now the freeway comes like this

1:57:33 ↗ 900 goes over right if you were to

1:57:38 ↗ actually raise the grade of i-90 through

1:57:41 ↗ here you then can pull the lanes apart

1:57:47 ↗ which creates enough room for a train

1:57:49 ↗ station in between the lanes and it's

1:57:52 ↗ now up at you know 20 feet which allows

1:57:57 ↗ you to put that crossing that we all

1:57:59 ↗ want at whether it's 12 maple or

1:58:01 ↗ somewhere 10th that basically is going

1:58:04 ↗ to cut through jack in the box sorry

1:58:06 ↗ Jack in the Box you know but then that

1:58:10 ↗ stays that grade so now you don't have

1:58:13 ↗ big ramps on some sort of over crossing

1:58:17 ↗ because of the amount of land that we

1:58:20 ↗ would lose on both sides for those for

1:58:23 ↗ that elevated crossing is catastrophe

1:58:25 ↗ catastrophic that but so this becomes

1:58:30 ↗ now I think a vision that we can start

1:58:32 ↗ to kind of see the benefits of but what

1:58:38 ↗ you've got to do is the first piece of

1:58:40 ↗ the puzzle is you've got to get washed

1:58:41 ↗ dot to be willing to pooch their freeway

1:58:44 ↗ they're they're approaching the freeway

1:58:47 ↗ everything west of sr 900 so it's it's a

1:58:51 ↗ version and I don't think we should get

1:58:52 ↗ bogged down on the engineering

1:58:54 ↗ difficulties of it but the Tricia's

1:58:56 ↗ point earlier if you don't state that as

1:58:59 ↗ your vision then you don't spend the

1:59:02 ↗ resources advocating and lobbying for

1:59:06 ↗ that as an outcome right and you and

1:59:08 ↗ what happens is then Sound Transit says

1:59:11 ↗ then watch dot says we're leaving our

1:59:12 ↗ freeway that's the way it is you can put

1:59:14 ↗ an over crossing at 12 and then Sound

1:59:17 ↗ Transit says well we're gonna put the

1:59:18 ↗ train station here because it can't be

1:59:21 ↗ in the right away I mean so so it's it's

1:59:23 ↗ a so this is this is where I think

1:59:26 ↗ having a clear vision can definitely

1:59:29 ↗ benefit the city yeah I think I think

1:59:31 ↗ the long now

1:59:32 ↗ now is the time to say with the

1:59:35 ↗ preferred tradition is I mean that may

1:59:38 ↗ not be aware shakes out in 20 years it's

1:59:39 ↗ fine

1:59:39 ↗ but say word is now and so that washed

1:59:42 ↗ out and sound transit why not make

1:59:44 ↗ decisions and awareness of that totally

1:59:46 ↗ this we can't have a vision without

1:59:48 ↗ saying we think this is where it's gonna

1:59:51 ↗ be and this is how we're going to

1:59:53 ↗ accommodate it's it's a huge it's

1:59:55 ↗ definitely the grill in the closet right

1:59:56 ↗ I mean and to not address it seems hard

2:00:00 ↗ and I think and I think even more

2:00:01 ↗ important that is it needs to be very

2:00:03 ↗ explicitly called out so that the

2:00:05 ↗ council endorses it doesn't matter what

2:00:07 ↗ we think what matters is does the

2:00:08 ↗ council say yes this is what the city's

2:00:11 ↗ official vision is of the light rail

2:00:13 ↗ station so I think it also needs to be

2:00:14 ↗ very clear and called out so that it has

2:00:17 ↗ to as the full weight of counsel behind

2:00:19 ↗ it well and just as I said we don't let

2:00:21 ↗ developers come in and tell us what

2:00:23 ↗ they're gonna do we tell them we want

2:00:24 ↗ them to do the same thing with d-o-t &

2:00:27 ↗ Sound Transit we should tell them what

2:00:30 ↗ we want and they should serve us don't

2:00:33 ↗ forget the lid through Mercer Island on

2:00:35 ↗ i-90 when that was all created and the

2:00:37 ↗ beautiful forested overpasses and

2:00:41 ↗ everything and the nice sports field

2:00:43 ↗ complex on the lid it's a billion

2:00:45 ↗ dollars a mile that d-o-t spent for that

2:00:48 ↗ because the city demanded it

2:00:51 ↗ so if Mercer Island can do it so can in

2:00:55 ↗ supply I mean do we want to be that

2:00:58 ↗ ambitious and well putting something a

2:00:59 ↗ job at that to have to agree so yes and

2:01:02 ↗ no I mean I think yes we need to be we

2:01:05 ↗ need to figure out how to be as smart as

2:01:07 ↗ we can to write that vision statement

2:01:10 ↗ that talks about the location and the

2:01:12 ↗ benefits to our community but I'm going

2:01:16 ↗ to tell you that I'm gonna guess

2:01:18 ↗ councils probably not gonna want to

2:01:20 ↗ settle on a transit station location

2:01:22 ↗ based on what we've done in two nights

2:01:25 ↗ it's gonna probably it's gonna probably

2:01:28 ↗ want to be a little bit of a more

2:01:30 ↗ proactive process with maybe a few other

2:01:34 ↗ stakeholders so so what I would say is

2:01:36 ↗ let's set this let's tee this ball up

2:01:38 ↗ right and so that the steps and put some

2:01:43 ↗ clarity in the implementation piece that

2:01:45 ↗ says you know within the next two to

2:01:48 ↗ three years or two years you know these

2:01:50 ↗ conversations need to happen that

2:01:52 ↗ station needs to land so that this

2:01:54 ↗ community can get in front of the

2:01:55 ↗ conversation and not have go back to

2:01:59 ↗ Lindsey's checklist I think a checklist

2:02:01 ↗ is a station station location needs to

2:02:03 ↗ be determined in the short-term the

2:02:06 ↗ vision is we might want to put in there

2:02:09 ↗ in that requirements once that decision

2:02:13 ↗ is made

2:02:15 ↗ revisit these two neighborhoods that are

2:02:18 ↗ gonna be most related to that or what

2:02:21 ↗ neighborhood I'm also going to suggest

2:02:24 ↗ that I really like your idea of having

2:02:25 ↗ all of the urban core as one

2:02:27 ↗ neighborhood which is Samaras Park

2:02:31 ↗ Pickering hila Tibbets

2:02:33 ↗ and a small section of Gillman I think

2:02:37 ↗ it fits I'm not sure about some image

2:02:40 ↗ part but let's let's let's talk through

2:02:42 ↗ it okay all right that's on the table so

2:02:47 ↗ you have the train station now what do

2:02:52 ↗ you plan on putting in those two areas

2:02:56 ↗ so I think from a primary use

2:03:00 ↗ perspective I think what we talked about

2:03:04 ↗ I think right now so right now Pickering

2:03:07 ↗ is commercial and retail and I think

2:03:11 ↗ that as we talk about areas that can be

2:03:14 ↗ walkable that can't have all the

2:03:16 ↗ services in them clearly for me

2:03:18 ↗ Pickering's one of those areas so what's

2:03:21 ↗ missing and Pickering is residential and

2:03:23 ↗ as we talked about last night we got a

2:03:25 ↗ property issue related to that but

2:03:27 ↗ assuming we all agree that there should

2:03:31 ↗ be residential in Pickering then one of

2:03:34 ↗ the implementation strategies one of the

2:03:36 ↗ successes is to remove the covenant

2:03:39 ↗ restriction that doesn't allow

2:03:40 ↗ residential on that property because

2:03:42 ↗ right now it is not allowed and it takes

2:03:45 ↗ 100% of the property owners to agree to

2:03:48 ↗ allow residential before it can go there

2:03:50 ↗ so so that's that's that's something

2:03:53 ↗ we'd have to work on it doesn't happen

2:03:55 ↗ by

2:03:55 ↗ so and if frankly Lowe's won't do it

2:03:57 ↗ unless there's a lot of pressure put on

2:03:59 ↗ them now if st3 is going to put in a

2:04:01 ↗ light rail somewhere and around this

2:04:03 ↗ area whether it's out on the south side

2:04:06 ↗ with a crossing that's going to be a

2:04:08 ↗ magnet for residential so it only makes

2:04:12 ↗ sense to put residential and picking so

2:04:15 ↗ are you going to specify the amount or

2:04:19 ↗ where so one of the questions that you

2:04:21 ↗ guys asked last night we actually had a

2:04:23 ↗ great tour by the way so for those of

2:04:25 ↗ you who've scheduled it for next week

2:04:26 ↗ hopefully it's as exciting was you know

2:04:30 ↗ if you if you you know was capacity it

2:04:34 ↗ was a capacity conversation and that is

2:04:36 ↗ if you put how much how much residential

2:04:41 ↗ is realistic to fit in Pickering how

2:04:43 ↗ much residential is realistic through

2:04:47 ↗ rally and Tibbets and if you know if the

2:04:51 ↗ answer comes back 7500 housing units

2:04:54 ↗ which is our target for the regional

2:04:56 ↗ growth center then I don't think we have

2:04:58 ↗ to kill ourselves to find residential in

2:05:01 ↗ all the other areas outside the core

2:05:03 ↗ because there's plenty of room in the

2:05:05 ↗ core and that that could change the

2:05:07 ↗ conversation a bit right you know trying

2:05:11 ↗ to push residential and some of the

2:05:13 ↗ other places now when you look at places

2:05:15 ↗ like BMC and we'll talk about that for

2:05:18 ↗ those of you didn't go on the tour you

2:05:19 ↗ know where BMC is on East Lake Sam you

2:05:23 ↗ know there was at least what seemed like

2:05:25 ↗ consensus last night that residential

2:05:27 ↗ there made sense you know that was a

2:05:30 ↗ place where you know you could if you

2:05:32 ↗ could actually improve pedestrian and

2:05:35 ↗ bike crossing of East Lake Sam to get

2:05:37 ↗ over to the employment areas which is

2:05:40 ↗ where Microsoft and Siemens and the

2:05:43 ↗ soon-to-be as a Crosse School District

2:05:45 ↗ office space you know that all makes

2:05:48 ↗ sense that's a horizontally mixed use

2:05:50 ↗ neighborhood it's got a little bit of

2:05:53 ↗ retail and maybe that's the piece we

2:05:55 ↗ focus on how do we work on that piece we

2:05:58 ↗ when we talked about like how much can

2:06:00 ↗ these regions carry would it be useful

2:06:02 ↗ to have any language in the vision about

2:06:04 ↗ leveraging the light rail station to

2:06:08 ↗ unlock additional density because I

2:06:10 ↗ think something that when you look at

2:06:12 ↗ codeine that I think is is kind of

2:06:13 ↗ enticing is to is to structure the code

2:06:15 ↗ so that develops so that you see you say

2:06:19 ↗ okay we can pull out so much growth

2:06:21 ↗ because that's as much as the grid the

2:06:23 ↗ street grid can handle but once the

2:06:25 ↗ light rail station opens that no means

2:06:28 ↗ that you can move more people in and out

2:06:29 ↗ in a given day and the vision would be

2:06:32 ↗ that you would structure the the code so

2:06:34 ↗ the developer could build something with

2:06:36 ↗ the idea that when only after this

2:06:39 ↗ particular event triggers they know that

2:06:42 ↗ that will then unlock additional coding

2:06:44 ↗ and so you can have development built

2:06:46 ↗ with the idea like oh I'm gonna go and

2:06:47 ↗ add ten more stories to this building

2:06:50 ↗ but only after the light rail station is

2:06:52 ↗ open because before that I can't handle

2:06:53 ↗ the amount of traffic would that be

2:06:54 ↗ something there would be help with that

2:06:55 ↗ so I'll I'll kind of go back to

2:06:58 ↗ something Jo said earlier because I

2:06:59 ↗ think it was spot-on I think that right

2:07:02 ↗ now this community is a little bit

2:07:04 ↗ freaked out about the density that might

2:07:07 ↗ be on the wave coming this direction and

2:07:10 ↗ so having a conversation about

2:07:11 ↗ increasing you know that density I think

2:07:14 ↗ I don't disagree AJ I think that's maybe

2:07:17 ↗ a conversation that this community might

2:07:19 ↗ want to have but maybe like in ten years

2:07:22 ↗ I think I think you might be able to use

2:07:25 ↗ it to counter that that concern because

2:07:27 ↗ you might tell people okay we're gonna

2:07:28 ↗ drop in seventy five hundred people at

2:07:32 ↗ some bit but you don't now yeah fifteen

2:07:34 ↗ thousand people but maybe five thousands

2:07:37 ↗ people won't show we won't allow those

2:07:39 ↗ those units to be built until we have

2:07:41 ↗ this light rail station and a better

2:07:42 ↗ light rail station happens in 2035 then

2:07:45 ↗ we allow those to build them and have

2:07:46 ↗ until 2045 we don't and so in doing so

2:07:48 ↗ you can talk people and say okay that

2:07:51 ↗ sounds like a lot of people but by the

2:07:52 ↗ time all those people show up we will

2:07:54 ↗ have x y&z of additional infrastructure

2:07:57 ↗ to support that right but until that

2:08:00 ↗ extra infrastructure shows up that's

2:08:02 ↗ 75,000 feet or 7500 people with more

2:08:05 ↗ cars on the road and more parking that

2:08:07 ↗ has to be provided

2:08:09 ↗ the problems the task force has was we

2:08:11 ↗ want to look to the future so builders

2:08:14 ↗ didn't have to have three parking spaces

2:08:16 ↗ for you

2:08:17 ↗ well how do you do that if you're you're

2:08:21 ↗ planning on something that's 30 years

2:08:23 ↗ away and you're gonna start it careful

2:08:27 ↗ with that because for sure but I think

2:08:30 ↗ when the task force tackled this

2:08:32 ↗ previously you don't have the guarantee

2:08:34 ↗ of a light rail station now we do and so

2:08:38 ↗ I think the vision could articulate that

2:08:40 ↗ we want the growth to be back loaded

2:08:43 ↗ what are you do in the meantime you just

2:08:45 ↗ don't use don't grow as much

2:08:47 ↗ well we okay Ben how you're going to

2:08:49 ↗ throttle it if if you're gonna start it

2:08:52 ↗ you know if you're ultimately looking

2:08:54 ↗ for 15,000 people what are you gonna put

2:08:56 ↗ it - five - yeah but finally you have to

2:09:02 ↗ get into this specific so that this is

2:09:03 ↗ only of this what do you do because what

2:09:05 ↗ happens if it all happens in five years

2:09:07 ↗ instead of in 30 years that's what

2:09:10 ↗ happened with us we figured we had 30

2:09:12 ↗ years for this to implement and all of a

2:09:15 ↗ sudden here we are less than 10 years

2:09:17 ↗ later and it's been implemented and

2:09:19 ↗ beyond what we could so depending on

2:09:22 ↗ light rail is good but until you get

2:09:24 ↗ that light rail you're gonna have people

2:09:26 ↗ parking and driving and the congestion

2:09:29 ↗ is gonna get worse and worse so I think

2:09:32 ↗ we need to get a little creative here

2:09:33 ↗ because you're onto something where you

2:09:35 ↗ time the zoning in a way to allow denser

2:09:39 ↗ urban zoning upon building of the train

2:09:43 ↗ station and you have that on the books

2:09:46 ↗ so a developer doesn't build something

2:09:49 ↗ and then go like oh damn I have only I'd

2:09:51 ↗ known and if I had waited eight more

2:09:53 ↗ years I could have gotten so much more

2:09:54 ↗ value approach Lowe's right now today

2:09:58 ↗ and say hmm 20 years from now I could

2:10:00 ↗ reap a fortune on zoning that allows me

2:10:03 ↗ to build 200 units and acres nothing but

2:10:06 ↗ I'm gonna have to wait and time blows an

2:10:08 ↗ offer today and then to appease the rest

2:10:11 ↗ of the community this is where you get a

2:10:13 ↗ little creative

2:10:14 ↗ you tell the developers those 200 units

2:10:17 ↗ you're going

2:10:17 ↗ - by the density credits from other

2:10:19 ↗ neighborhoods that we don't want to

2:10:22 ↗ develop as densely and those people want

2:10:25 ↗ maybe they want less density and who

2:10:28 ↗ knows I think when it comes back to the

2:10:31 ↗ vision as I was saying layoffs I think

2:10:33 ↗ my vision is that that little pocket

2:10:36 ↗ were the lows is if while that Lytro

2:10:39 ↗ station is being built or excuse me if

2:10:42 ↗ before the allegro station is being

2:10:43 ↗ built I'm fine with that just being a

2:10:45 ↗ Lowe's I don't think that needs to turn

2:10:46 ↗ into anything more beautiful than a lows

2:10:48 ↗ because it's in kind of a crappy corner

2:10:50 ↗ underneath an interstate what I think my

2:10:52 ↗ perfect vision is that at the same time

2:10:55 ↗ that lateral station is being built that

2:10:57 ↗ Lowe's is being torn down by some

2:10:59 ↗ developer and some much larger building

2:11:02 ↗ that's hopefully mixed eves is being

2:11:03 ↗ built and they open it more or less more

2:11:06 ↗ or less the same time I think that's

2:11:08 ↗ that's my vision I think that would be

2:11:10 ↗ great so you so you get to a point that

2:11:12 ↗ you have an open station and you have a

2:11:14 ↗ great mixed use neighborhood that's very

2:11:15 ↗ dense before then you don't you you kind

2:11:19 ↗ of didn't roll with the existing use

2:11:20 ↗ because we don't have the transit

2:11:22 ↗ infrastructure to get more people in

2:11:24 ↗ that which is great but the problem is

2:11:27 ↗ we put the moratorium in place because

2:11:29 ↗ we were getting development that we

2:11:32 ↗ didn't want and so the lows could

2:11:37 ↗ develop into something in the meantime

2:11:40 ↗ and then we're gonna be stuck with it

2:11:42 ↗ yeah but you do that by putting in extra

2:11:44 ↗ requirements like requiring ground

2:11:45 ↗ ground for a retail required 90%

2:11:47 ↗ structure parking you put in all these

2:11:49 ↗ things that we want that's gonna cause

2:11:51 ↗ the developer to be like wow I'm not

2:11:53 ↗ gonna do all of that and build a

2:11:54 ↗ five-story building and have to have

2:11:56 ↗ 100% erection Park or grand for a retail

2:11:58 ↗ because that doesn't make sense in this

2:11:59 ↗ neighborhood at this time I think it

2:12:01 ↗ comes down to a lot of stuff that we

2:12:03 ↗ were talking about on like on Wall

2:12:04 ↗ Street about being really really

2:12:07 ↗ assertive with with what we require the

2:12:10 ↗ developers and if developers say well

2:12:12 ↗ that doesn't pencil out all right okay

2:12:14 ↗ you know we can we can wait and stick

2:12:17 ↗ with the existing structures until that

2:12:20 ↗ pencils out so we we make progressive

2:12:22 ↗ coding and where the code we we have

2:12:27 ↗ lying we say this is the code today and

2:12:29 ↗ this is the code that will be in

2:12:31 ↗ existence and when fc3 comes in and they

2:12:35 ↗ put a station there this is how this

2:12:37 ↗ property is going to transform so

2:12:39 ↗ everybody has transparency they see how

2:12:40 ↗ it's going to work and in the meantime

2:12:42 ↗ we don't get overloaded with a bunch of

2:12:44 ↗ growth that we can't do anything with so

2:12:46 ↗ so right the the the reason why why you

2:12:51 ↗ have a vision that is implementation

2:12:54 ↗ agnostic is because of that very reason

2:12:57 ↗ right is that you never want to lock

2:13:00 ↗ yourself into certain situations that

2:13:03 ↗ you don't know will happen so it's

2:13:06 ↗ always it has to be very implementation

2:13:09 ↗ agnostic what is your if you had a you

2:13:13 ↗ had your druthers you could just do

2:13:15 ↗ anything what would you do with this is

2:13:17 ↗ is how you create a vision statement you

2:13:21 ↗ cannot have like specifics because they

2:13:24 ↗ are all contingent on other things

2:13:26 ↗ happening so you see where that will

2:13:28 ↗ fall apart right and then you'll have to

2:13:31 ↗ read you like that's that's an

2:13:33 ↗ implementation plan and you can adjust

2:13:35 ↗ your implementation plan but vision

2:13:36 ↗ always has to remain kind of the view of

2:13:39 ↗ what in its in its wonder what is

2:13:43 ↗ aquatics like I was actually thinking

2:13:45 ↗ well what I was my comment was actually

2:13:49 ↗ reflection of what we have today an

2:13:52 ↗ amendment to it and they would be backed

2:13:55 ↗ by the code like what Ken was saying you

2:13:57 ↗ have your vision which is aspirational

2:13:59 ↗ and kind of guidance and then you you

2:14:01 ↗ have to build a code around it so that

2:14:05 ↗ developers have guidance as to what is

2:14:08 ↗ the expectation and what do I need to do

2:14:10 ↗ and then we have city staff that are

2:14:13 ↗ trained and our strong enough to tell

2:14:16 ↗ the developer hey this is the code this

2:14:18 ↗ is the vision this is what you need to

2:14:20 ↗ follow which is actually really just an

2:14:23 ↗ amendment of what we have here

2:14:25 ↗ we just haven't added

2:14:27 ↗ I mean this is Pickering and what we're

2:14:29 ↗ talking about doing is probably

2:14:30 ↗ revamping Pickering so we probably

2:14:33 ↗ picked the most difficult thing to start

2:14:35 ↗ with yeah you can but you can you can I

2:14:38 ↗ think you can do that in the vision you

2:14:40 ↗ can have for the primary use and then

2:14:43 ↗ the in the fin the future state you

2:14:44 ↗ could have something that says the

2:14:45 ↗ vision is that this state will not just

2:14:48 ↗ maybe this land-use will not change

2:14:50 ↗ dramatically

2:14:51 ↗ so until so you think about it in the

2:14:54 ↗ other direction so you can say that part

2:14:57 ↗ of the implementing strategies is you

2:14:59 ↗ know that within you know three years of

2:15:02 ↗ the construction of the train station

2:15:05 ↗ look at increasing density to this

2:15:08 ↗ neighborhood to facilitate more Tod

2:15:12 ↗ development a measure of success then if

2:15:16 ↗ you're gonna do because you know their

2:15:17 ↗ needs there's another layer that we've

2:15:19 ↗ added to the end potentially that would

2:15:21 ↗ be a measure of success would be that

2:15:23 ↗ that that area around the train station

2:15:27 ↗ within a walking distance of the train

2:15:29 ↗ station ends up being a high the highest

2:15:32 ↗ density within Central Issaquah that's a

2:15:34 ↗ vision that's a vision piece right

2:15:36 ↗ because and then you have to say how do

2:15:38 ↗ we get there so so that could be I think

2:15:43 ↗ one of the things recognizing time and

2:15:46 ↗ your meeting and knowing that we have a

2:15:48 ↗ couple members of the public that may or

2:15:50 ↗ may not want to say something I guess

2:15:52 ↗ the question for you all is looking

2:15:56 ↗ there was a conversation about whether

2:16:00 ↗ or not we want to hang on to ten or

2:16:02 ↗ whether we want to look at creating

2:16:05 ↗ basically a regional growth center

2:16:08 ↗ neighborhood and periphery for lack of a

2:16:13 ↗ better word at quarter tonight so I

2:16:15 ↗ guess I'm looking for either show of

2:16:17 ↗ hands or some sentiment from the task

2:16:21 ↗ force and the Commission on which way

2:16:25 ↗ you'd like to see that because what I'd

2:16:26 ↗ like to do is have us actually share if

2:16:30 ↗ we're sticking with ten at least for now

2:16:32 ↗ to share with you this document so you

2:16:34 ↗ guys can start to actually look at it

2:16:36 ↗ and make some comments so that when we

2:16:39 ↗ come in

2:16:39 ↗ next time we can kind of hit the ground

2:16:41 ↗ running but if there's if the group

2:16:45 ↗ liked AJ suggestion that maybe we talked

2:16:48 ↗ about this as one then what we would

2:16:52 ↗ give you is we would kind of put a

2:16:54 ↗ different construct together and and

2:16:56 ↗ head and give you that so it would look

2:17:00 ↗ a bit different it would still have the

2:17:01 ↗ same elements but geographically I think

2:17:05 ↗ could be defined differently and maybe

2:17:07 ↗ the vision for kind of this central

2:17:11 ↗ piece of central Issaquah would be

2:17:13 ↗ written maybe a little bit different a

2:17:15 ↗ little bit more boldly than maybe say

2:17:19 ↗ old route 10 and the service area would

2:17:22 ↗ be so if we actually went towards the

2:17:25 ↗ direction of making it more unified and

2:17:29 ↗ looking at Pickering and that we are

2:17:33 ↗ talking about making that possibly the

2:17:35 ↗ highest density and we were still

2:17:39 ↗ talking about one or we're talking about

2:17:42 ↗ less than ten but we're talking about I

2:17:48 ↗ think is you break it into two themes

2:17:52 ↗ you have central central mr. qua the

2:17:55 ↗ kind of the urban core and then you have

2:17:57 ↗ the yeah we got to figure out the right

2:18:01 ↗ word to use it because it's still urban

2:18:03 ↗ it's still essentially Issaquah but it's

2:18:04 ↗ not as urban and so then all whether

2:18:08 ↗ it's the Western gateway or old route 9

2:18:10 ↗ or East Lake they're all of they're all

2:18:13 ↗ in the same tier yeah

2:18:15 ↗ you give them different names for

2:18:17 ↗ placemaking reasons and then that

2:18:19 ↗ there's real value to that but you but

2:18:21 ↗ you break it down that you very clearly

2:18:22 ↗ and have two tiers or development both

2:18:24 ↗ still very much still central it's like

2:18:26 ↗ what quality development so like your

2:18:28 ↗ central district where design code still

2:18:30 ↗ applies to the whole swath but you

2:18:32 ↗ clarify that you've got a more urban

2:18:36 ↗ urban core and then the less dense but

2:18:40 ↗ still urban neighborhood and we could

2:18:41 ↗ actually put themes there so definitely

2:18:44 ↗ you know we could have me

2:18:46 ↗ or fewer than 10 and just have

2:18:50 ↗ neighborhood themes with the same

2:18:53 ↗ building code or the same type of

2:18:56 ↗ buildings but markets actually different

2:18:58 ↗ I think the risk of reducing the

2:19:01 ↗ quantity of zones is that some zone will

2:19:05 ↗ actually get lost in the overall I think

2:19:11 ↗ you're right I think the way to mitigate

2:19:12 ↗ that is for the for the secondary

2:19:14 ↗ districts you keep them of the same size

2:19:16 ↗ and so that they still get the love care

2:19:19 ↗ and focus that they need but I think I

2:19:21 ↗ think the idea of stitching together

2:19:22 ↗ Tibbets and Pickering and perhaps a

2:19:24 ↗ chunk of Gillman is I think it makes

2:19:26 ↗ more sense to think of that as a single

2:19:27 ↗ neighborhood rather than separate

2:19:29 ↗ neighborhoods think that makes more

2:19:30 ↗ sense from a playing standpoint maybe in

2:19:33 ↗ the future state from a placemaking

2:19:34 ↗ standpoint you pivot back to them as

2:19:36 ↗ separate place makings but any from a

2:19:38 ↗ planning sample I think it makes more

2:19:40 ↗ sense to plan that as a single

2:19:42 ↗ neighborhood so when you go through this

2:19:46 ↗ 10 you might find that other stitch

2:19:49 ↗ together but I think we have to look at

2:19:51 ↗ that as individual oh yeah that one goes

2:19:54 ↗ here but I do want to give anybody who

2:19:59 ↗ has anything to say the opportunity to

2:20:01 ↗ say that so I'm going to open up the

2:20:05 ↗ public hearing at 8:55 and ask if

2:20:11 ↗ anybody would like to come to the podium

2:20:14 ↗ and make a statement before it gets too

2:20:17 ↗ late

2:20:21 ↗ no I I'm just I don't need to come to

2:20:24 ↗ the podium I do I have to yeah so I'm

2:20:39 ↗ John and I I run the Grange and have

2:20:42 ↗ just about a year and about a year in

2:20:46 ↗ two months and I don't really have

2:20:47 ↗ anything to to say other than I'd love

2:20:51 ↗ to go on the tour at the the next chance

2:20:55 ↗ for what it's worth

2:20:58 ↗ we've raised wages at the Grange 20

2:21:00 ↗ percent since I started something that

2:21:03 ↗ our board and our members have plotted

2:21:06 ↗ and as for our future you were a fuel

2:21:10 ↗ stop and have been since 1943 so we hope

2:21:16 ↗ to get through the board to also be an

2:21:17 ↗ electronic vehicle charging hub

2:21:21 ↗ somewhere down the road as we a think

2:21:22 ↗ that probably the stats are in 2022 the

2:21:28 ↗ internal combustion cars will be the

2:21:30 ↗ same price as EVs and they probably

2:21:33 ↗ already are and just finally you can run

2:21:37 ↗ your green necklace through our yard

2:21:42 ↗ well I have a question for you so since

2:21:46 ↗ you're down in that area yeah do you see

2:21:50 ↗ we don't consider it down

2:21:53 ↗ [Laughter]

2:21:57 ↗ so what did what would you like to see

2:22:00 ↗ what would help you in your business

2:22:02 ↗ help you well we talked about it a

2:22:05 ↗ little bit I mean we could use more

2:22:07 ↗ lighting we could use sidewalks it's

2:22:10 ↗ it's it's a bit of a bastard though

2:22:13 ↗ because you've got you've got kind of

2:22:15 ↗ our funky store and then you've got this

2:22:17 ↗ fairly modern office doctor complex then

2:22:21 ↗ you've got then you've got bones right

2:22:24 ↗ and you almost think like if you could

2:22:26 ↗ just take that piece out and slide us

2:22:28 ↗ together that it would make more sense

2:22:32 ↗ so I'm what y'all have us is quite a

2:22:34 ↗ challenge I think I think you know the

2:22:38 ↗ times that I've winced a little since I

2:22:40 ↗ took the position is when we talk about

2:22:42 ↗ old town and I've actually heard people

2:22:45 ↗ say cuz there's a sign that says thank

2:22:46 ↗ you for visiting like downtown old

2:22:49 ↗ Issaquah and yet on the other side of

2:22:51 ↗ that sign is Derry gold bones and the

2:22:55 ↗ Grange the oldest businesses in Issaquah

2:22:58 ↗ and so I you know I'm not sure you'll be

2:23:02 ↗ able to do this and you know people like

2:23:03 ↗ well it's just a dairy well it's a dairy

2:23:04 ↗ with a pretty cool mural you know and

2:23:06 ↗ I've lived here you know we moved here

2:23:08 ↗ at 64 so I'm and I'm about guy so I love

2:23:11 ↗ neighbourhood so I you know I think to

2:23:14 ↗ try to incorporate that into Old Town

2:23:16 ↗ although I don't really see exactly how

2:23:18 ↗ to do it I think would be nice um we're

2:23:20 ↗ looking at a really large remodel The

2:23:22 ↗ Grange is fine we have a lot of money in

2:23:24 ↗ the bank and and where we you know we're

2:23:27 ↗ still doing about ten million dollars a

2:23:29 ↗ year and so I think sometimes about a

2:23:32 ↗ Grange village I think about having it

2:23:35 ↗ there actually be something that's more

2:23:37 ↗ almost like a like a livery stable and

2:23:41 ↗ things like that I will tell you that

2:23:43 ↗ probably in the next two years we're

2:23:44 ↗ gonna build a barn and do concerts in

2:23:46 ↗ the barn but it but the barns gonna be

2:23:50 ↗ because we we sell tons and tons and

2:23:53 ↗ tons of hay and you can't do hay dry or

2:23:55 ↗ you can't do hay wet right you can't

2:23:57 ↗ deliver it wet so we need to we need to

2:23:59 ↗ have a place we can pull the semis in

2:24:01 ↗ drop off and pick up pay so I think I

2:24:06 ↗ mean I think it would be great if it

2:24:07 ↗ were well lit and more

2:24:08 ↗ more walkable I guess as this is the

2:24:10 ↗ short answer but that's also you know

2:24:12 ↗ that's also on us too you know I like

2:24:16 ↗ the that coming in with a barn and I

2:24:19 ↗ think that when we get the opportunity

2:24:21 ↗ to talk about that particularly

2:24:23 ↗ neighborhood now we have something else

2:24:25 ↗ to put in there and I've always seen it

2:24:28 ↗ as a way to get into Old Town so think

2:24:31 ↗ yeah and I think finally you talk about

2:24:33 ↗ in that neighborhood in the old route n

2:24:36 ↗ neighborhood something that's really

2:24:38 ↗ started to come up and we just finished

2:24:40 ↗ expanding it as of today is we have a

2:24:42 ↗ community room set off of our offices

2:24:45 ↗ and we we've knocked out a wall because

2:24:48 ↗ the community room is too small and

2:24:51 ↗ because it's in so we've expanded the

2:24:53 ↗ community room and probably because of

2:24:55 ↗ the TV show with the shiplap we have us

2:24:59 ↗ wing a barn door that opens the

2:25:01 ↗ community room but yeah I mean that gets

2:25:05 ↗ used I mean everybody from AAA to

2:25:07 ↗ backcountry horsemen use that room and

2:25:10 ↗ so in our little neck of the woods

2:25:13 ↗ that's become quite the hub and we

2:25:15 ↗ support it we go looking for it and the

2:25:17 ↗ Grange really is committed our marketing

2:25:20 ↗ budgets pretty much all Community Giving

2:25:22 ↗ now so we're really trying to hub up

2:25:24 ↗ thank you yeah sure but anybody else

2:25:28 ↗ like to

2:25:37 ↗ okay David Kepler right here I walked to

2:25:41 ↗ the Grange but I I missed your bulk bulk

2:25:45 ↗ winter a cover crop seeds in both bins

2:25:49 ↗ for that oh okay all I saw was

2:25:56 ↗ everything in bags okay thank you

2:25:59 ↗ strange is cool okay from San Francisco

2:26:03 ↗ Connie doesn't believe the slope be

2:26:06 ↗ behind Home Depot should be in the

2:26:09 ↗ central is a call plan and she doesn't

2:26:13 ↗ think the State Park should be in the in

2:26:15 ↗ the central Issaquah plan Mary made some

2:26:20 ↗ much comments and read a lot of them

2:26:22 ↗ were about wildlife corridors we're

2:26:25 ↗ gonna have wildlife through this town

2:26:26 ↗ with the State Park with the hundreds of

2:26:29 ↗ acres there and what's going to end up

2:26:30 ↗ in the State Park

2:26:32 ↗ it was just ten days ago a cougar was

2:26:35 ↗ killed on Highland Highlands Drive

2:26:37 ↗ between the hospital and i-90 somewhere

2:26:40 ↗ on there okay no I'm not I can't so you

2:26:45 ↗ know past like two minutes after it

2:26:47 ↗ happened it was one of the weirdest yeah

2:26:50 ↗ so you know they're they're traveling

2:26:53 ↗ through it was after it was an evening

2:26:55 ↗ right was after the Bergsma meetings I

2:26:58 ↗ believe so it happened later but they

2:27:01 ↗ move around we know that they seen him

2:27:03 ↗ in the cameras that that matt has had it

2:27:05 ↗ Issaquah High School behind his wife

2:27:07 ↗ school and part point and bears in the

2:27:11 ↗ rest but so let's be sure we recognize

2:27:13 ↗ wildlife will be there

2:27:15 ↗ they love the creeks the Tibbets in in

2:27:17 ↗ Issaquah Creek they're gonna be there

2:27:20 ↗ and let's make sure keep them as safe as

2:27:22 ↗ possible you know the vision there's a

2:27:28 ↗ lot of good discussion on vision we're

2:27:30 ↗ gonna visit you know we could have the

2:27:32 ↗ best vision in the world and unless we

2:27:35 ↗ have the the codes the regulations and

2:27:37 ↗ the policy we're going to just have more

2:27:39 ↗ disasters so I'm concerned the

2:27:42 ↗ moratorium is almost done with right I

2:27:44 ↗ don't know if the council will you know

2:27:46 ↗ stand a little bit more but there's you

2:27:50 ↗ know you can only do that there'll be a

2:27:52 ↗ year so I'm not sure how much more they

2:27:53 ↗ want to keep going or can't keep going

2:27:57 ↗ so when it gets right down to this thing

2:28:01 ↗ if the test is right now or when you're

2:28:06 ↗ finished when you're finish your process

2:28:08 ↗ the moratorium is over the the developer

2:28:12 ↗ from h e double toothpicks is that my

2:28:15 ↗ students just to say you know will they

2:28:19 ↗ decide i don't want to deal in this

2:28:21 ↗ place or it's it's gonna be tough to

2:28:24 ↗ deal with theirs is it was gonna be you

2:28:26 ↗ know really expecting high expectations

2:28:28 ↗ and i'm gonna have to do a great job and

2:28:29 ↗ i can do it here

2:28:31 ↗ i mean we are a world class area the

2:28:34 ↗ whole world is looking at us i mean

2:28:36 ↗ where were the fastest-growing areas in

2:28:37 ↗ the country the economics here is

2:28:39 ↗ obscene and in terms of house values and

2:28:43 ↗ the rest they're all looking at us and

2:28:46 ↗ we want the best to come and we want to

2:28:49 ↗ be able to make sure the best do their

2:28:51 ↗ best and not the worst come to do their

2:28:54 ↗ worst thank you i could ask if anybody

2:29:01 ↗ else wants to speak but seeing nobody

2:29:04 ↗ I'm going to close the public hearing at

2:29:09 ↗ 9:05 and continue it on the 30th right

2:29:17 ↗ bring up an idea though between now and

2:29:19 ↗ the 30th that I like staff to look at if

2:29:22 ↗ possible is reducing the number of

2:29:25 ↗ districts rather than come back to 30th

2:29:29 ↗ and talk about it if it's something you

2:29:30 ↗ would because you talk teeth about ideas

2:29:32 ↗ very sands or whatever and I'd like to

2:29:35 ↗ reduce it to four or districts or four

2:29:38 ↗ neighborhoods and if it's possible to

2:29:41 ↗ pull up there's this central area zoning

2:29:44 ↗ map would be the easiest to show

2:29:47 ↗ I can do that right now I got it

2:29:53 ↗ this is a test Keith it doesn't test

2:30:04 ↗ though I think I said I still get the

2:30:06 ↗ point that the John in Maine that I

2:30:07 ↗ don't I want to make sure that the the

2:30:10 ↗ secondary neighborhoods don't look too

2:30:11 ↗ big that you're still not able to make

2:30:13 ↗ that the placemaking I need to make

2:30:15 ↗ sense for just feels a little too small

2:30:18 ↗ we'll talk through it I wonder if it's

2:30:21 ↗ possible to do placemaking separate from

2:30:26 ↗ neighborhood zoning

2:30:28 ↗ how'd you get here I should move on yes

2:30:33 ↗ well how'd you get there if we end up

2:30:36 ↗ back Maps

2:30:37 ↗ piano-like sorry white man : service

2:30:41 ↗ free map static maps so then I could end

2:30:46 ↗ up having those as district

2:30:50 ↗ neighborhoods yeah I almost wonder if he

2:30:55 ↗ comes districts as kind of a higher

2:30:57 ↗ level and then neighborhoods or

2:30:58 ↗ economies yeah or even just the idea of

2:31:01 ↗ you know within this central Issaquah

2:31:06 ↗ area being able to say okay we've got a

2:31:10 ↗ map of the overarching green necklace

2:31:13 ↗ we've got a map of the well-known places

2:31:17 ↗ that are and our vision of what they

2:31:20 ↗ should be and then these are kind of the

2:31:23 ↗ zones the urban core and the periphery

2:31:29 ↗ okay so here's what my thought was yeah

2:31:32 ↗ so number one would be urban core and

2:31:35 ↗ Jerry if you can kind of show that Jerry

2:31:49 ↗ is read a lot of presentations and them

2:31:54 ↗ so well yeah it's supposed to be red but

2:31:58 ↗ it's snow or salmony so that's yeah been

2:32:01 ↗ core and that's retail growth centre too

2:32:02 ↗ so there's you know so there's that

2:32:04 ↗ piece of this which is that's also the

2:32:07 ↗ regional growth centre an urban core and

2:32:12 ↗ it's a hole next to it

2:32:15 ↗ so hila is right here so that's under

2:32:19 ↗ the valley development agreement so

2:32:20 ↗ that's all urban zoning right now what

2:32:26 ↗ map is that

2:32:27 ↗ [Laughter]

2:32:29 ↗ it's whatever it's never seen it before

2:32:33 ↗ my life never central Issaquah plan oh

2:32:37 ↗ you want to go to do anything it's

2:33:00 ↗ coherent but that was part of trying to

2:33:02 ↗ make the like I don't I don't want like

2:33:04 ↗ nine it's in the piano right I want to

2:33:06 ↗ the plan oh you're in the regional

2:33:10 ↗ center she's she's in the plan mm-hmm

2:33:13 ↗ and it's not too narrow what is it

2:33:16 ↗ because if it for on page 32 that's

2:33:38 ↗ that's crg see yeah yeah so that's the

2:33:41 ↗ regional grow center it's in the it's in

2:33:45 ↗ the central Issaquah zoning map that you

2:33:48 ↗ can find but I can explain it from here

2:33:51 ↗ so that I want to pop it on the tab so

2:33:55 ↗ the so the red color and hila are both

2:34:01 ↗ urban zoning that's the urban core and

2:34:04 ↗ those should be in my mind those should

2:34:07 ↗ be had the same vision to eventually be

2:34:09 ↗ developed if we didn't have i 90 going

2:34:13 ↗ through it we would have that would be

2:34:14 ↗ the urban core of the city gateway would

2:34:17 ↗ be its own district because it really is

2:34:19 ↗ stuck out there by itself and i don't

2:34:22 ↗ think we need to concentrate a lot on it

2:34:24 ↗ because there's not much else that's

2:34:25 ↗ going to happen there in the next 30

2:34:28 ↗ years the the purple color is all the

2:34:33 ↗ mixed use zoning and I think all that

2:34:36 ↗ can be essentially one neighborhood

2:34:39 ↗ because it's not open

2:34:41 ↗ but we do want mixed-use we want

2:34:43 ↗ residential we want jobs we want retail

2:34:47 ↗ the lower left portion so it's sort of

2:34:50 ↗ the red checks portion below down there

2:34:54 ↗ that's the that's the urban residential

2:35:00 ↗ or village residential kind I think that

2:35:02 ↗ can be its own visionary district

2:35:06 ↗ because that's but almost go down into

2:35:09 ↗ old town but I think it could stand

2:35:10 ↗ alone itself and then the other two

2:35:13 ↗ would be old town historic historic

2:35:17 ↗ district yeah and I think that could go

2:35:21 ↗ into old town is a qualm I don't think

2:35:25 ↗ it fits in the urban vision we're

2:35:27 ↗ talking about move that in Old Town and

2:35:29 ↗ then the service district you can even

2:35:32 ↗ take out of the central Issaquah plan

2:35:34 ↗ it's agreed so we get down to for just

2:35:39 ↗ the urban the mixed-use gateway and then

2:35:43 ↗ and then we have to boundary change

2:35:46 ↗ gateway doesn't even need to be part of

2:35:49 ↗ the site and then we reduce yeah I would

2:35:53 ↗ like to keep it because that is our

2:35:55 ↗ gateway and it finding and so as we also

2:36:01 ↗ talked about the need for conductivity

2:36:04 ↗ to the park and other things and so a

2:36:06 ↗ bridge over and we need parks so you've

2:36:10 ↗ already developed that but to stick it

2:36:12 ↗ out there is sticking it out and just an

2:36:14 ↗ orphan because there because there's

2:36:18 ↗ still a lot that can be done you know to

2:36:19 ↗ rebuild a new port way with the bridge

2:36:21 ↗ over 90 even though there might not be

2:36:23 ↗ many new buildings built i think there's

2:36:25 ↗ there others there's other stuff that's

2:36:27 ↗ involved so asian i hadn't looked at it

2:36:29 ↗ this way but i mean realistically zoning

2:36:32 ↗ drives whatever happens on the land

2:36:35 ↗ way more than any vision we may come up

2:36:38 ↗ with the zoning is what determines price

2:36:41 ↗ value and what you can do hi

2:36:44 ↗ right city so it makes perfect sense to

2:36:47 ↗ align the visions to the zoning

2:37:02 ↗ fortunately it's close to existing

2:37:07 ↗ zoning is close to what we kind of have

2:37:10 ↗ a consensus could generally be the

2:37:12 ↗ visions and then I think really then the

2:37:14 ↗ discussion is do we want does our vision

2:37:17 ↗ want to tweak the zoning at all do we

2:37:18 ↗ want to turn some salmon purple and

2:37:20 ↗ purple salmon or vice vary or something

2:37:22 ↗ like that I think that's in the question

2:37:23 ↗ I think I think I like the idea of those

2:37:25 ↗ are our districts and then I think maybe

2:37:27 ↗ at the next meeting yes we should have a

2:37:29 ↗ little bit of Scotian about okay do we

2:37:30 ↗ do we disagree slightly where the zoning

2:37:32 ↗ switch is because it'll so it'll be yeah

2:37:35 ↗ so the the vision of the new districts

2:37:39 ↗ or neighborhoods could then Mazzone akan

2:37:44 ↗ vers Asian absolutely let's do it that

2:37:45 ↗ way as opposed to the other way if we do

2:37:50 ↗ that looking at Gillman and Old Town can

2:37:56 ↗ we reduce density requirements which

2:37:59 ↗ would be what down zoning then or is it

2:38:02 ↗ would we leave the zoning as it is and

2:38:04 ↗ put that density in the urban core like

2:38:08 ↗ pet green area where we have even higher

2:38:10 ↗ density and that way we actually allow

2:38:14 ↗ the others portions of the city to

2:38:17 ↗ breathe

2:38:21 ↗ maybe because I think if I look at them

2:38:23 ↗ and that that French treat is you get to

2:38:25 ↗ Oldtown it I think there's still plenty

2:38:27 ↗ of room for that to grow it just needs

2:38:30 ↗ to grow in a way that that transitions

2:38:31 ↗ very organically to too old down so why

2:38:34 ↗ don't we look at that but my guess is

2:38:36 ↗ that the zoning that's in place on those

2:38:38 ↗ two neighborhoods was not necessarily

2:38:41 ↗ enough zone when it got at it into the

2:38:43 ↗ central Issaquah he's talking about

2:38:44 ↗ Gilman they like red check this area

2:38:47 ↗ check there okay so is that considered

2:38:50 ↗ high-density now or is that is that so

2:38:55 ↗ if we actually just it's it's mixed-use

2:38:57 ↗ residential that can go to 65 feet yeah

2:39:02 ↗ that's a lot different than Garden

2:39:04 ↗ Apartments yeah so maybe moving which is

2:39:07 ↗ out of the CIP and or leave it in the

2:39:11 ↗ CIP well we have it in the CIP that that

2:39:13 ↗ means it's going to be higher density

2:39:15 ↗ right so it could be the idea is if we

2:39:17 ↗ put more of the density in you

2:39:21 ↗ concentrate densities well Ron I think

2:39:23 ↗ what are you doing why don't ya well I

2:39:25 ↗ think the the suggestion was to make

2:39:27 ↗ that its own neighborhood I think we can

2:39:30 ↗ then talk about next time if that's if

2:39:32 ↗ that's the cat's the consensus of a

2:39:34 ↗ majority of the group I think staff can

2:39:37 ↗ go repackage this up that way then we

2:39:39 ↗ can have a conversation about that

2:39:41 ↗ neighborhood and we'll figure out what

2:39:43 ↗ name it is because the one that staff

2:39:45 ↗ has is not very glamorous and so well we

2:39:50 ↗ can then talk about the density and look

2:39:52 ↗ at zoning for that zone and say ok now

2:39:55 ↗ that we've created that as a

2:39:56 ↗ neighborhood here's what the zoning regs

2:39:58 ↗ would allow there does that still make

2:40:00 ↗ sense or does that not make sense and we

2:40:02 ↗ can add that conversation yeah and what

2:40:06 ↗ I like where you're going that's where I

2:40:07 ↗ was going to which is you know if we

2:40:09 ↗ would have had creative policies in

2:40:13 ↗ place that said you know we don't really

2:40:15 ↗ want 400 units at the gateway parcel why

2:40:20 ↗ don't we let high density area owners or

2:40:23 ↗ future owners buy some of those 400

2:40:27 ↗ units and transfer them into the high

2:40:29 ↗ density area and leave a hundred you

2:40:32 ↗ that's on gateway and then that way

2:40:34 ↗ everybody's still made whole but we're

2:40:36 ↗ not giving free density we own it that

2:40:40 ↗ way in the first place nobody should get

2:40:42 ↗ free zoning that makes them instant

2:40:44 ↗ multimillionaires just because you

2:40:46 ↗ happen to own a property we should make

2:40:47 ↗ them by the density from other parcels

2:40:50 ↗ where we don't want that growth to go

2:40:52 ↗ that's and it's happening everywhere

2:40:55 ↗ that's why we get all screwed up in our

2:40:57 ↗ building and developments because we

2:41:00 ↗ hand out free zoning like candy because

2:41:03 ↗ people of course want it so they can

2:41:05 ↗ become an instant multi-millionaire but

2:41:22 ↗ I don't turn it off how does it go up

2:41:25 ↗ there's a limit but what you can put in

2:41:29 ↗ there realistically and so you're gonna

2:41:31 ↗ have to spread some of this out if you

2:41:33 ↗ want to get it in the root so just

2:41:35 ↗ saying putting it in there is not gonna

2:41:37 ↗ work no way and so it's getting to be a

2:41:42 ↗ little late and I think you've just

2:41:45 ↗ given Keith and Trish some things to do

2:41:49 ↗ to prepare for the next meeting and I

2:41:52 ↗ think that we'll all be more prepared if

2:41:54 ↗ you know we're kind of you talk and you

2:41:59 ↗ talk about this vision and that vision

2:42:01 ↗ you finally come to a conclusion I think

2:42:03 ↗ we're in a point where we're going to go

2:42:05 ↗ on and actually get into it my only

2:42:10 ↗ concern is getting realistic zoning in

2:42:16 ↗ place so that builders know what they

2:42:19 ↗ can build what we want as a city and I

2:42:23 ↗ think

2:42:25 ↗ extremely important and and that's great

2:42:29 ↗ you look at that and say okay we're

2:42:30 ↗ going to put all the the residential in

2:42:33 ↗ there but how are we going to do it what

2:42:36 ↗ are the requirements that we're going to

2:42:37 ↗ put in what kind of areas are you going

2:42:41 ↗ to put in for roads and the green

2:42:45 ↗ necklace all that can be put into into

2:42:47 ↗ this when they get enough time and

2:42:51 ↗ staffing to put it all together but with

2:42:53 ↗ that I kind of like to say that you know

2:42:57 ↗ we've talked about it for for enough

2:42:59 ↗ tonight and I think we need some rest

2:43:01 ↗ here and I think we will continue on the

2:43:08 ↗ possibility of a meeting tucked in

2:43:11 ↗ between the thirtieth and today like

2:43:13 ↗ after the tour on Thursday the 16th to

2:43:17 ↗ two meet we couldn't have this room but

2:43:20 ↗ we could find a room do you think that

2:43:24 ↗ you want to that would be thanks - no

2:43:28 ↗ thanks Turkey will be provided on the

2:43:34 ↗ 1616 so that there'd be the tour for

2:43:36 ↗ those of you that didn't go on the tour

2:43:38 ↗ and then you know we'd have like pizza

2:43:40 ↗ or something and then have a meeting

2:43:42 ↗ just to try to get farther so that you

2:43:47 ↗ don't think that you have to have

2:43:48 ↗ everything done on the 30th because

2:43:50 ↗ anybody available in the 16th I'm

2:43:53 ↗ available I was planning on going on the

2:43:54 ↗ tour that day so right I don't know if I

2:43:59 ↗ could do the tour and then amazing yeah

2:44:03 ↗ the tour was two hours right

2:44:08 ↗ [Laughter]

2:44:11 ↗ I think that's I think that's too much I

2:44:14 ↗ think I just study going on the tour

2:44:15 ↗ okay so alright yeah after talking do we

2:44:19 ↗ want to make a choice which one's more

2:44:21 ↗ important well I haven't been on the

2:44:23 ↗ tour yet I think is more important to

2:44:29 ↗ the rest of that zoning here find

2:44:35 ↗ another night that's not a Thursday and

2:44:37 ↗ that Thanksgiving so try to get people

2:44:39 ↗ back together to talk about it or do

2:44:41 ↗ people think that they'll be fine on the

2:44:43 ↗ 30th you know I think oh it got to a

2:44:47 ↗ point where we can take it to where we

2:44:50 ↗ need to go and then say staff this is

2:44:53 ↗ what we want you write up the code to to

2:44:56 ↗ make it happen I don't think we can do

2:44:58 ↗ that we can tell you what we want how we

2:45:01 ↗ want it or would like to have it and

2:45:04 ↗ maybe at that point in time you can go

2:45:07 ↗ on so I think as long as we have

2:45:10 ↗ something from you guys beforehand if

2:45:12 ↗ they ask for from you guys to us is do

2:45:17 ↗ some wordsmithing on this and come with

2:45:20 ↗ your proposals then we can be more

2:45:25 ↗ actionable at that point I mean is you

2:45:30 ↗ decide that you're not going to get off

2:45:32 ↗ track and go back to the vision and go

2:45:34 ↗ back to this that we actually have to

2:45:36 ↗ focus on either connecting the groups or

2:45:41 ↗ keeping them ten or whatever you want to

2:45:43 ↗ do but let's do that I think the fact

2:45:46 ↗ that we've made some good

2:45:48 ↗ recommendations on yeah

2:45:50 ↗ bringing it ten down and then also what

2:45:53 ↗ should be included in it I think we

2:45:56 ↗ might be able to do it if we could we'll

2:46:00 ↗ just you know if we stay longer and

2:46:03 ↗ that you know you'll be expecting that

2:46:05 ↗ you're gonna stay longer than 10:30 and

2:46:08 ↗ and you greeted that it's either that or

2:46:10 ↗ another meeting so we're asking the city

2:46:12 ↗ to actually take some of the ideas we

2:46:14 ↗ have put them into a proposal to present

2:46:16 ↗ to us so that we can talk about it and

2:46:19 ↗ then make a decision or tweak it yeah I

2:46:22 ↗ I think we go with just one meeting and

2:46:24 ↗ that's my request well that's what I'm

2:46:26 ↗ getting at it would just you know but

2:46:29 ↗ tonight I think that we have we're done

2:46:31 ↗ talked about it enough so I kind of like

2:46:34 ↗ that close the meeting it sure and I

2:46:36 ↗ would say to that the central is qwop

2:46:38 ↗ plan is really short for a plan and I

2:46:41 ↗ would recommend if anyone haven't

2:46:43 ↗ haven't read it in a while the whole

2:46:45 ↗ first part is the intro about the task

2:46:47 ↗ force and why it is the way it is why

2:46:50 ↗ the task force was what it was but all

2:46:52 ↗ the work that you did and all their

2:46:53 ↗ outreach and and why it came to be that

2:46:56 ↗ that's the boundary and it talks all

2:46:58 ↗ about sustainability and mountains to

2:47:00 ↗ sound and so it's just a good refresher

2:47:02 ↗ to help ground the next revisit of the

2:47:06 ↗ visions to maybe give that another look

2:47:08 ↗ I know we could all find ourselves but

2:47:10 ↗ could you include it as an appendix and

2:47:13 ↗ the next one is a reminder for us to

2:47:14 ↗ look thank you I will

2:47:15 ↗ I don't want to downgrade all of the

2:47:18 ↗ effort and time that the task force put

2:47:21 ↗ into this I mean there were reasons

2:47:23 ↗ behind what they talked about and there

2:47:26 ↗ was a group of 2012 seem like to put in

2:47:32 ↗ a lot of time and a lot of

2:47:34 ↗ discussion on this so I don't want to

2:47:36 ↗ say that you know we're gonna actually

2:47:38 ↗ we flailed around for the first few

2:47:40 ↗ meetings until of course you'd kind of

2:47:43 ↗ all come together about the third what

2:47:46 ↗ we just did tonight

2:47:48 ↗ well okay so I am gonna call the meeting

2:47:52 ↗ those at 9:25 thank you so much are we

2:48:03 ↗ at next meeting we

2:48:12 ↗ 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