Planning Policy Commission · Thursday, July 25, 2019 · City Council Digest

1. CALL TO ORDER

Commission Membership

packet pp.3

Previously discussed: Planning Policy Commission · Jun 13, 2019

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 2020 – Ron Faul land use documents. 2020 – Joan Probala 2022 – Joy Lewis Membership 2022 – Janice Carle The Planning Policy Commission is comprised of 2022 – Bill Rinehart seven regular members, with four-year terms; and 2022 – Jason Voiss several alternates, with two-year terms. All 2023 – Randy Harrison 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, 2020 – Tom Haskins see IMC 18.03. 2020 – Robin Beukers 2020 – Vacant 2020 – Vacant

2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES

Minutes of July 11, 2019

packet pp.5–8

Previously discussed: Planning Policy Commission · Jun 13, 2019

▶ Watch from 1:04 Open packet at p.5 ↗

Staff report:

APPROVAL OF MINUTES a) 07-11-19 Planning Policy Commission Minutes Page [0000] CITY OF ISSAQUAH Planning Policy Commission 6:30 PM Council Chambers July 11, 2019 MINUTES 135 E. Sunset Way

3. REGULAR BUSINESS

Public Meeting - Amendments to Issaquah's Comprehensive Plan: Parks, Recreation, Trails, and Open Space Element (Goals & Policies Only), (I)

Jennifer Fink, Park Planner Chante Floreani, Park Planner & Project Administrator · packet pp.9–42

Topics: Land UseParks

Previously discussed: Park Board · Apr 22, 2019 Planning Policy Commission · May 28, 2019

Open packet at p.9 ↗

Staff report:

On June 14, 2018 the Planning Policy Commission (PPC) met to address the Parks Strategic Plan's Goals & Policies (Chapter 5) and hold a public hearing. The Commission

4. OTHER BUSINESS / ANNOUNCEMENTS

Upcoming Schedule

packet pp.43

Open packet at p.43 ↗

Staff report:

OTHER BUSINESS / ANNOUNCEMENTS a) 2019 PPC Schedule (tentative) (updated 7/16/19) All meetings located in Council Chambers unless noted January 2019 September 2019 1/10/19 Cancelled 9/5/19 Public Hearing: Olde Town Code Amendments 1/24/19 Public Hearings: a) Comp Plan 2019 Docket 9/12/19 Open House: Olde Town Architectural Standards/Design Guidelines b) Code amendment: Wireless Communication Facilities Also: Comments from the Mayor 9/26/19 Introduction: Sign Code Update • Comp Plan Amendments: Capital Facilities Element • Land Use Element re: Tree Canopy/policies February 2019 • Public meeting (not a hearing): Comp Plan Amendments: Community 2/14/19 Facilities rezones Continued Public Hearing: Code amendment: Wireless Facilities Introduction: Comp Plan Amendments: Treasures

1058 segments .txt ↗

0:25 ↗ again about Parks and Recreation I would

0:31 ↗ like to welcome the park board members

0:36 ↗ that are here tonight so that we can get

0:39 ↗ their input and to thank Ron for being a

0:43 ↗ member of the the task force that went

0:52 ↗ through the plan and made great changes

0:57 ↗ to us so I want to thank but all of them

0:59 ↗ that that was responsible for that

1:01 ↗ before we start we do as normal have to

1:04 ↗ approve the minutes for the last meeting

1:07 ↗ and so I need a motion to approve the

1:11 ↗ minutes of the July 11th meeting I'd

1:17 ↗ like to make a motion to approve the

1:19 ↗ minutes of the Planning Policy

1:20 ↗ Commission being on July 11 2019 do I

1:24 ↗ have a second we have two seconds so I

1:30 ↗ guess it's pretty good discussion I

1:34 ↗ assume you read the minutes and you have

1:37 ↗ no questions or discussions about the

1:39 ↗ minutes done hearing none I'll call for

1:43 ↗ the question all those in favor of

1:45 ↗ approval of the July 11th minutes please

1:50 ↗ say aye opposed anybody abstaining

2:00 ↗ hearing that none I will the minutes are

2:05 ↗ approved now we're gonna go right into

2:08 ↗ discussion on the park plan just as a

2:11 ↗ reminder we spent several meetings last

2:15 ↗ year discussing the strategic plan and

2:19 ↗ the park board plan and we approved we

2:23 ↗ voted to approve the plan but we did

2:28 ↗ little caveat and asked them to come

2:31 ↗ back a year later and specify really

2:36 ↗ three or four things that we asked them

2:37 ↗ to improve upon and so that's what we're

2:39 ↗ going to discuss tonight we're not going

2:42 ↗ to prove the plan itself because it's

2:45 ↗ already been approved by the City

2:47 ↗ Council we're just looking at updating

2:49 ↗ what has been approved and our concerns

2:53 ↗ that we've boys last year so with that

2:57 ↗ we are going to have the liaison the

3:03 ↗ city liaison to the park board Jennifer

3:06 ↗ give us an update at what's going on so

3:08 ↗ anyway thank you very much Joan and

3:11 ↗ thank you planning policy commission for

3:14 ↗ having us and thank you Brad for being

3:16 ↗ here before we get going on our

3:20 ↗ presentation I first want to let you

3:24 ↗ know the packet that was handed out

3:26 ↗ tonight

3:27 ↗ as you all know when you go through a

3:29 ↗ revision process there are times where

3:32 ↗ you get multiple versions of a cop

3:33 ↗ document

3:35 ↗ unfortunately an older copy was included

3:37 ↗ in your meeting packet what was sent out

3:40 ↗ earlier today and it's before you is the

3:43 ↗ final version we will walk through later

3:44 ↗ what was missing those what was missing

3:48 ↗ was included in your packet in the track

3:51 ↗ changes so if you did go through that

3:52 ↗ you will notice those items but there's

3:56 ↗ one item that will specify on here when

3:59 ↗ as we go through so I just wanted to

4:01 ↗ extend my apologies to the Commission

4:02 ↗ for that makes up we were out of town

4:05 ↗ and not able to get it to you sooner so

4:07 ↗ our sincere apologies I am here tonight

4:10 ↗ with my coworker Shawn TEI Floriani also

4:13 ↗ Park planner and project administrator

4:15 ↗ and as you Joan so nicely said we were

4:18 ↗ here last year in June going through the

4:23 ↗ park strategic plan update that was a

4:26 ↗ process that took us about a year and a

4:28 ↗ half had a lot of community engagement

4:30 ↗ input with the park board as the

4:32 ↗ steering committee and had a lot

4:34 ↗ and got here and council adopted that

4:36 ↗ plan in July when we came to you last

4:40 ↗ June the Planning Policy Commission

4:45 ↗ issued your findings of fact that really

4:48 ↗ to discuss three main items as part of

4:51 ↗ this one was a general reorganization of

4:54 ↗ the goals and policies that tracked

4:55 ↗ issues identified by the public as areas

4:57 ↗ of concern and facilitates ease of use

5:00 ↗ by the public stronger language around

5:03 ↗ wayfinding and signage that is the

5:06 ↗ former policy number and formulated

5:09 ↗ scope for green Issaquah including

5:11 ↗ habitat restoration open space wildlife

5:16 ↗ in riparian corridors of maintenance of

5:19 ↗ not just weeds and tree canopy included

5:23 ↗ in your packet are the original goals

5:26 ↗ and policies that were in the park

5:27 ↗ strategic plan our track changes version

5:31 ↗ and a clean version which I handed out

5:33 ↗ to you tonight and so those are the

5:35 ↗ three main documents and we'll be

5:37 ↗ talking about our processes that we went

5:40 ↗ through in doing so after the Planning

5:42 ↗ Policy Commission issued their findings

5:45 ↗ effect we went to City Council and they

5:48 ↗ adopted the park strategic plan and

5:50 ↗ provided two directives that we were

5:52 ↗ returned to you within one year and

5:54 ↗ initiate a green Issaquah urban forest

5:57 ↗ program within one year in the 2019

6:00 ↗ parks and recreations work plan

6:03 ↗ including a citywide tree canopy

6:05 ↗ analysis that work is currently underway

6:08 ↗ so when we look at what the PPC's

6:11 ↗ purview really is items a and B are

6:16 ↗ being addressed really in the goals and

6:19 ↗ policies that are before you tonight

6:20 ↗ item C is being addressed as a work plan

6:23 ↗ item as perk city council directive at

6:30 ↗ the beginning of this year we created

6:32 ↗ the park board created an ad hoc

6:34 ↗ committee to address the changes as

6:37 ↗ recommended by you the PPC

6:40 ↗ in that committee there were three park

6:42 ↗ board members Brad book who is here with

6:44 ↗ us tonight he's our Park Board Chair

6:46 ↗ Jonathan Richardson Chris Kovac and

6:49 ↗ Planning Policy commission member Ron

6:52 ↗ fall over the five we met five times

6:58 ↗ over six or five five times over a

7:03 ↗ two-month period each meeting was a

7:05 ↗ minimum of two hours plus homework was

7:09 ↗ given sorry guys

7:10 ↗ and each park board member or an ad-hoc

7:13 ↗ committee members spent about 15 hours

7:16 ↗ or more of their own time in this effort

7:19 ↗ of reorganization so I want to extend a

7:22 ↗ great thank you to them for their hard

7:23 ↗ work in this effort in our meetings our

7:27 ↗ first meeting

7:28 ↗ first and second meeting was more of

7:30 ↗ just a general overview kind of a

7:32 ↗ breaking things down into some buckets

7:34 ↗ and groupings we did identify two new

7:38 ↗ goals in that kind of buckets and

7:39 ↗ groupings list the second third and

7:43 ↗ fourth meeting so we really got down

7:44 ↗ into the nitty gritties of each policy

7:47 ↗ language wording and then our fifth

7:49 ↗ meeting was really going over the

7:52 ↗ complete package and looking at it as a

7:57 ↗ full synthesis for the meetings and as

8:00 ↗ part of this I will hand this over to

8:05 ↗ Shantae Floriani who is going to start

8:08 ↗ walking us through the reorganization

8:11 ↗ we're just going to give you a

8:12 ↗ high-level effort of what we went

8:15 ↗ through so you understand the thought so

8:18 ↗ what that I'm here's Shantae nice to

8:23 ↗ meet you all

8:24 ↗ so yeah as Jennifer said I will walk you

8:27 ↗ through sort of our process for

8:29 ↗ modifying other goals and policies so

8:32 ↗ this image that you see on the screen is

8:35 ↗ a basically a screenshot from how we

8:37 ↗ started to organize all of the goals and

8:41 ↗ subsequent policies and the first thing

8:44 ↗ we did for tracking is we actually

8:47 ↗ numbered

8:49 ↗ policy so that we could track it

8:51 ↗ throughout the process as we go through

8:53 ↗ all the area

8:55 ↗ and then what this does what this shows

8:57 ↗ is what we call buckets as goals and

9:00 ↗ then and then grouping so identifying

9:04 ↗ policies that have like categories or

9:07 ↗ themes and and grouping those together

9:09 ↗ and seeing which bucket they fall into

9:12 ↗ that the best fit with it with overall

9:16 ↗ document so some policies may have

9:20 ↗ repetitive language but our housed in

9:22 ↗ the appropriate goal in sub category

9:25 ↗ fulfills for example art may be

9:28 ↗ mentioned in two different areas and in

9:32 ↗ this process we identified two new goals

9:37 ↗ so we went from a total of six goals to

9:40 ↗ eight and those two new goals were

9:46 ↗ connectivity and environmental

9:49 ↗ preservation the subsequent policies

9:52 ↗ under the new goals were existing and

9:54 ↗ were just rearranged under these new

9:56 ↗ gold buckets so I could just read you

9:58 ↗ the two new goals so connectivity which

10:01 ↗ is goal C Connect parks neighborhoods

10:03 ↗ business districts schools and other

10:05 ↗ activity areas together through an

10:07 ↗ integrated system of trails and open

10:09 ↗ spaces and then the other ethical

10:13 ↗ environmental preservation which is goal

10:15 ↗ e reserve enhance and protect a

10:19 ↗ coordinated system of parks and public

10:21 ↗ open spaces to preserve the city's

10:23 ↗ natural character sustain its urban

10:25 ↗ forest resources and enhance its natural

10:28 ↗ systems wildlife habitat and wildlife

10:30 ↗ corridors as a legacy for future

10:32 ↗ generations

10:43 ↗ so in this process we also identified

10:47 ↗ gaps that and then in that process we

10:52 ↗ found five new policies that were added

10:58 ↗ and you can see here so we have a policy

11:03 ↗ c9 which is a connectivity goal C 9 and

11:07 ↗ C 10 are both connectivity goals he was

11:10 ↗ a planning and design considerations

11:12 ↗ Arab site policy

11:13 ↗ excuse me and she is under gold is under

11:19 ↗ the partnership scold and again so the

11:25 ↗ detail of each policy was reviewed for

11:26 ↗ appropriate placement sentence structure

11:29 ↗ tense and repetitions so as part of the

11:38 ↗ findings effect to be we just wanted to

11:42 ↗ point out the added language or stronger

11:46 ↗ language around signage and wayfinding I

11:49 ↗ was specifically requested by the

11:51 ↗ Planning Policy Commission and so you

11:57 ↗ can see the added goal here there's two

12:00 ↗ other verbs are youth policy there's two

12:03 ↗ other policies that are in under signage

12:06 ↗ they were existing we just pulled them

12:08 ↗ out as two separate policies for added

12:11 ↗ clarity

12:23 ↗ so as Jennifer handed out you can see

12:27 ↗ generally the new organization new

12:30 ↗ format and a new format was too freaking

12:36 ↗ for clarity and to fall it to fit within

12:39 ↗ the park strategic plan and better for a

12:45 ↗ better user experience and facilitate

12:47 ↗ ease of use by the public

12:49 ↗ so just so again in that process of

12:54 ↗ reviewing the goals and policies the

12:57 ↗ language was simplified to remove

12:58 ↗ redundancy and to add clarity we

13:05 ↗ all the comments were public comments

13:07 ↗ received during the parts park strategic

13:09 ↗ plan adoption process were reviewed and

13:12 ↗ taken into consideration by the ad hoc

13:14 ↗ committee in the revised goals and

13:16 ↗ policies before you and then here I'll

13:24 ↗ just walk through the version correction

13:27 ↗ that we handed out to you tonight the

13:29 ↗ you can see the items light with red

13:32 ↗ lines next to them they were not

13:37 ↗ included in the packet and in your

13:40 ↗ handout they are in your handout tonight

13:43 ↗ but they were in the track changes

13:46 ↗ version so all of these were existing

13:52 ↗ there was just d12

13:56 ↗ which is at the bottom of this screen

13:57 ↗ here was the only new policy the other

14:01 ↗ item the other policies in red were

14:03 ↗ existing and then same with these d 13

14:10 ↗ and d 14 were existing policies that

14:14 ↗ were just broken into two from the

14:17 ↗ original

14:25 ↗ and then goal viii with again an

14:35 ↗ existing policy that was emitted from

14:40 ↗ what we had given to you in the packet

14:51 ↗ with that I will pass it back over to

14:54 ↗ Jennifer to conclude so just a comment I

14:58 ↗ really appreciate the way it's broken

15:02 ↗ out and the green color I'm sure the

15:05 ↗ green is appropriate for trees and all

15:08 ↗ the other thoughts stuff that you're

15:09 ↗ working on I think it's a lot easier to

15:12 ↗ read and really appreciate all the work

15:15 ↗ you did to do that

15:24 ↗ so in advance of the planning policy

15:27 ↗ Commission meeting we did receive a

15:30 ↗ public comment and just wanted to bring

15:33 ↗ to your attention we feel those items

15:37 ↗ have been addressed in the items before

15:40 ↗ you one of the questions was to create

15:44 ↗ include language that describes

15:45 ↗ consistent and easily understandable

15:47 ↗ public process we do have existing

15:50 ↗ policy in the packet before you D one

15:54 ↗ that states ensure that parks are

15:56 ↗ designed utilizing a thoughtful planning

15:58 ↗ process that includes community

15:59 ↗ engagement creates a sense of place and

16:02 ↗ integrates landscape art buffers

16:03 ↗ waterways corridors trails parks

16:05 ↗ courtyards and plazas also as part of

16:09 ↗ the city's public and transparent

16:11 ↗ process we do also have a community

16:14 ↗ engagement public engagement toolkit

16:16 ↗ that we use whenever we take on a new

16:18 ↗ project or we engage with the community

16:21 ↗ that is used on a regular basis the

16:25 ↗ second item that was comment that was

16:28 ↗ received as to please include a policy

16:31 ↗ that parks will create a process and

16:33 ↗ criteria for partnerships with

16:35 ↗ for-profit business should they be

16:37 ↗ included within our park system this is

16:40 ↗ somewhat addressed in two ways

16:42 ↗ Gold G really addresses extensive types

16:46 ↗ of partnerships that may come before the

16:48 ↗ city and proposals and also in the park

16:51 ↗ strategic plan when this was before you

16:55 ↗ you may remember we set up a toolkit

16:58 ↗ that is used so when there is a new idea

17:02 ↗ that comes through it's a two-step to

17:05 ↗ acquit tool kit excuse me it's been a

17:07 ↗ long day the first one page is really

17:11 ↗ the vetting to see if it's a viable

17:13 ↗ project or not and then the second phase

17:16 ↗ of the toolkit this is a checklist and

17:19 ↗ then the second page will talks about

17:22 ↗ project prioritization and how it fits

17:24 ↗ with our existing projects just because

17:27 ↗ it may be a new shiny opportunity

17:29 ↗ doesn't mean it's necessarily something

17:31 ↗ that we need to pursue right away and

17:34 ↗ see how it fits with all of our other

17:36 ↗ projects so we feel that too has been

17:38 ↗ addressed within the park strategic plan

17:41 ↗ has adopted in within existing policy so

17:46 ↗ just to sum up the process that we went

17:50 ↗ through we the ad-hoc committee met in

17:53 ↗ February and March of this year we did

17:56 ↗ in April send the draft goals and

18:01 ↗ policies to a reader team it is the same

18:03 ↗ reader team that was utilized in the

18:06 ↗ park strategic plan adoption process

18:08 ↗ because they were already familiar we

18:10 ↗ sent those to the people and there's a

18:12 ↗ list of the reader team members we did

18:16 ↗ receive some comments back but most of

18:17 ↗ them were about planning at large and

18:19 ↗ not specific to the goals and policies

18:21 ↗ themselves the stig go before the park

18:25 ↗ board in April for review as a draft and

18:28 ↗ in May they made a recommendation and

18:31 ↗ tonight here we are before you the

18:34 ↗ planning policy commission and pending

18:36 ↗ your determination tonight we will take

18:39 ↗ this to City Council at a date yet to be

18:41 ↗ determined

18:45 ↗ just to sum up

18:47 ↗ [Music]

18:49 ↗ first I would like to ask if the park

18:52 ↗ board since we do have a couple of

18:55 ↗ committee members I would like to invite

18:56 ↗ them if they would like to say a word or

18:58 ↗ two before we wrap up about the process

19:01 ↗ and the engagement that happened as part

19:05 ↗ of this in the effort put forth if they

19:07 ↗ wanted to add any additional comments

19:09 ↗ Brad or Ron why don't we start with you

19:18 ↗ do you have any great words of wisdom

19:21 ↗ I think words of wisdom are already

19:28 ↗ included in this document was a good

19:31 ↗ team effort to buy some of the concerns

19:36 ↗ that PPC had last year likely I don't

19:40 ↗ know how comfortable we were initially

19:42 ↗ when we adopted this within the park

19:45 ↗ strategic plan a lot of our efforts were

19:48 ↗ in different portions of it so I'm glad

19:50 ↗ that this got rework it gets a lot

19:54 ↗ easier to read better organized a rid of

19:57 ↗ a lot of the wordiness implications I

20:00 ↗ don't I'm pretty happy with it it wasn't

20:03 ↗ necessarily an exciting process but one

20:06 ↗ to go through it was really good to have

20:08 ↗ Ron there with us if insight about how

20:11 ↗ you might look at things they're doing

20:13 ↗ it back to you really the heavy lifting

20:16 ↗ was done by Jennifer and Shonte walk

20:21 ↗ committee we were there more of an

20:22 ↗ advisory than to redo everything when I

20:25 ↗ give a big shout out to those two for

20:27 ↗ all the Whoopie question I think we're

20:40 ↗ the topics that we really that it was

20:43 ↗ the organization because there was a lot

20:45 ↗ of feedback that the original document

20:47 ↗ was hard to organize our hearts who

20:49 ↗ understand because a lot of people got

20:50 ↗ tripped up on the way was organized and

20:54 ↗ it may have spoken well to one type of

20:56 ↗ audience but the other three or four

21:00 ↗ audio and three out of four audiences

21:01 ↗ looked at it and didn't understand it so

21:04 ↗ spent a lot of effort reorganizing it I

21:07 ↗ think that's really the key and then we

21:10 ↗ went through we didn't wordsmith it but

21:12 ↗ we went through from a high level and

21:14 ↗ said this policy looks like we need to

21:17 ↗ maybe add a policy or add a section here

21:21 ↗ and say you know what we need to were

21:23 ↗ missing this area like an e canopy and

21:26 ↗ so on there was a lot of work who I

21:32 ↗ liked working with Brad it was great

21:34 ↗ working with the park support and I

21:36 ↗ think he for the invite that was awesome

21:38 ↗ you guys did do most of the heavy

21:40 ↗ lifting we were just kind of there for

21:42 ↗ an advisory do you appreciate the invite

21:45 ↗ to PPC and so I think this is a great

21:50 ↗ document and

21:51 ↗ like to feedback and I'm ready to

21:54 ↗ approve it the one thing that I really

21:58 ↗ liked was the part that it's more

22:03 ↗ readable I like the fact that you

22:05 ↗ separated some of the wordy language I

22:08 ↗ think it makes it more accessible not

22:12 ↗ easy to read or anybody who wants to go

22:17 ↗ into the park plan so that part of it I

22:19 ↗ really like I like the way you organized

22:22 ↗ that the goals and changed because they

22:24 ↗ did meet four criteria and by separating

22:29 ↗ them into two really makes it easy to

22:33 ↗ read I really appreciate that that's a

22:35 ↗ good positive one more thing and

22:41 ↗ actually Jeff points this out in some of

22:44 ↗ the discussions that we had is it was

22:46 ↗ difficult for us to not spend more time

22:49 ↗ than we already did when this because

22:51 ↗ word smithing is very time consuming and

22:55 ↗ so we had to kind of watch ourselves and

22:59 ↗ not try and we do everything that was

23:02 ↗ not the intent of this project it was

23:04 ↗ all designed for reorganization purposes

23:09 ↗ to minimize some of the duplications and

23:12 ↗ make it easier but just something to

23:15 ↗ point out is is that this will be

23:19 ↗ something in the next update you just

23:23 ↗ took my next date no I did

23:26 ↗ that will the wordsmithing will be

23:28 ↗ something that will be more intense

23:31 ↗ later process than when there's strew

23:34 ↗ and you'll be able to tell what the

23:36 ↗ timing of that is so the park strategic

23:39 ↗ plan it gets updated every four years we

23:41 ↗ do this for two reasons one to help

23:44 ↗ update the park element of the

23:46 ↗ comprehensive plan as well as stay

23:49 ↗ eligible for recreation and conservation

23:51 ↗ office funding so we will start this

23:55 ↗ process and probably for less than four

23:58 ↗ years now we will get the ball rolling

24:01 ↗ and during that we will be addressing

24:02 ↗ some other issues that were discussed in

24:04 ↗ this document like level of service and

24:07 ↗ doing a more thorough update of the

24:09 ↗ goals and policies as Brad mentioned you

24:11 ↗ know we did this was an exercise of

24:13 ↗ reorganization but where we did find

24:16 ↗ gaps where we did find a new goal to

24:19 ↗ house some underlying policies were

24:21 ↗ needed we did take those liberties in

24:24 ↗ addressing this so we tried to stay

24:26 ↗ within the guise of what was our

24:28 ↗ direction was and clean things up as

24:31 ↗ best we could knowing there is going to

24:33 ↗ be a full update in the next future the

24:36 ↗ next update about four years in the

24:42 ↗ Brad's point one of the things that we

24:43 ↗ really did work on was removing a lot of

24:47 ↗ duplication there was a significant

24:49 ↗ amount of duplication across different

24:51 ↗ goals and so what we did was that's how

24:53 ↗ we came up with some of the other goals

24:54 ↗ we he moved the goals from one area to

25:00 ↗ another subject and the goals he just

25:12 ↗ reworded some of the goals that they

25:13 ↗ were more broad but I think helps make

25:17 ↗ it a lot more did help with the

25:20 ↗ readability to build on that bran is

25:23 ↗ some of the phrasing there had been so

25:26 ↗ many updates of some of the goals and

25:27 ↗ policies that when we went through we go

25:31 ↗ back a slider to here what we did is we

25:36 ↗ have

25:36 ↗ you know your general topics or

25:39 ↗ subcategories underneath a goal but we

25:42 ↗ also put the most important part of the

25:44 ↗ goal or keywords at the front and kind

25:46 ↗ of switched how some of the goals were

25:49 ↗ worded or consistency between all of

25:53 ↗ them so you know create and implement

25:56 ↗ performance levels implement and

25:59 ↗ actionable and short comprehensive plan

26:01 ↗ goals and those we highlighted for quick

26:03 ↗ cueing in the old update we did have

26:06 ↗ titles on each of the policies and we

26:10 ↗ took those off and really the new

26:13 ↗ subcategories really address some of

26:15 ↗ that as well we spent a lot of time not

26:19 ↗ so much word smithing but making sure

26:21 ↗ they all read in the same language and

26:24 ↗ sentence formatting which also helped

26:27 ↗ with a lot of that duplication and

26:29 ↗ repetition and bits and pieces here and

26:32 ↗ there so this is a much leaner cleaner

26:34 ↗ meaner version of the goals and policies

26:36 ↗ I when you look at this it's more when

26:41 ↗ you're talking about word smithing and

26:43 ↗ it's important to make it easily to read

26:45 ↗ and understand about that I think what's

26:48 ↗ in it is more important than being

26:52 ↗ concerned about what word goes where how

26:55 ↗ if it's an N or an is or whatever I

26:58 ↗ think you've covered every possible I

27:02 ↗ mean I when I read it I couldn't imagine

27:06 ↗ anything else in it so I'm sure there is

27:08 ↗ but I really think you've covered just

27:13 ↗ about everything and that's what's

27:14 ↗ important to me is what's in it

27:17 ↗ good job well thank you the ad hoc

27:21 ↗ committee put in a lot of efforts I

27:23 ↗ thank them as well well it's nice when

27:26 ↗ you end up with a good product that you

27:29 ↗ can say I'm proud of this and I think

27:32 ↗ with everything we went through getting

27:35 ↗ it and the meetings we had before you

27:38 ↗ even started this I think it's come a

27:41 ↗ long way and I think it's kind of like

27:43 ↗ how I would write something very you

27:47 ↗ know this is the garden you put things

27:49 ↗ underneath it it makes sense and I'm

27:52 ↗ thinking of myself as a normal person

27:54 ↗ not a you know a data person or or

27:58 ↗ somebody that wants more specific

28:05 ↗ somebody so he was the first one here so

28:08 ↗ anyway so is there are there any

28:11 ↗ questions

28:12 ↗ Randy do you have any questions I know

28:14 ↗ some was a lot of

28:23 ↗ you can't they can't hear you that so I

28:27 ↗ I'm not sure that I should take up any

28:30 ↗ time because the I'm still learning I

28:33 ↗ what this process or this commission is

28:36 ↗ about so and though it's that I made I

28:37 ↗ think or if it's done it's so I don't

28:41 ↗ think there's any percentage of me bring

28:42 ↗ you about except for one thing in the

28:46 ↗ list of rats to the park there were two

28:52 ↗ things cited noxious weed in the

28:56 ↗ coincidence couldn't have been more

28:58 ↗ ironic because our community our

29:02 ↗ neighborhood is in the process of

29:06 ↗ identifying potential for catastrophic

29:10 ↗ well I I would just suggest that perhaps

29:16 ↗ one word I'd be added if it's after the

29:22 ↗ study it's considered to be relevant

29:24 ↗ over here in addition to noxious weeds

29:29 ↗ it's a species fire

29:36 ↗ works

29:41 ↗ that we just we have a very serious

29:50 ↗ party to the dress

29:55 ↗ if I can go back to item C here which

30:00 ↗ was also part of the council direction

30:03 ↗ as part of our work plan we are

30:04 ↗ currently under contract with for Terra

30:06 ↗ to start an urban forest management

30:09 ↗ program and also working and green

30:14 ↗ Issaquah program for the city where

30:19 ↗ Terra is going to be going out and

30:20 ↗ having a subcontractor take a look at

30:22 ↗ all of our facilities creating a report

30:24 ↗ looking at some of the threats within

30:27 ↗ each acre of our park space hopefully

30:30 ↗ here soon and so the greenest Quandt

30:33 ↗ initiative is really going to house a

30:35 ↗ lot of different the urban forest

30:38 ↗ management program excuse me it's going

30:40 ↗ to house a lot of different things the

30:41 ↗ green Issaquah initiative the tree

30:43 ↗ canopy update and i think some of the

30:45 ↗ information that's learned there will

30:46 ↗ also help to feed that information as

30:49 ↗ far as future fire because that is a

30:51 ↗ weakness I think citywide as far as our

30:54 ↗ preparedness yeah a wildlife wildlife

31:10 ↗ yeah oh as fires no my point is that the

31:15 ↗ simple addition of that word for people

31:17 ↗ that do read it I think cause people go

31:20 ↗ huh yeah most I wasn't that it's just an

31:32 ↗ awareness

31:34 ↗ ask questions and I think I think from a

31:37 ↗ planning perspective and a parks manager

31:40 ↗ and steward I think let's see what comes

31:43 ↗ out of our green Issaquah initiative and

31:45 ↗ what that might help us set the stage

31:47 ↗ for a larger citywide conversation about

31:50 ↗ fire management especially in some of

31:52 ↗ our resources because that's a whole

31:53 ↗ nother set of planning that we're not

31:55 ↗ quite prepared for to do but it is very

31:59 ↗ important I agree anyway anybody else I

32:04 ↗ thought you guys did a fantastic job

32:07 ↗ someone who wasn't here in June of last

32:09 ↗ year to watch this thing conceived it

32:11 ↗ was very easy to read so a big THANK YOU

32:14 ↗ to the ad hoc committee and as well as

32:17 ↗ the staff and I think it's all been said

32:19 ↗ but the organization well very easy to

32:24 ↗ follow

32:25 ↗ hey thank you 30 seconds I would

32:29 ↗ actually agree with the whole wildfire I

32:31 ↗ know we're going to work on it but the

32:32 ↗ important side and I am in agreement

32:35 ↗ with that I think it's very so thank you

32:37 ↗ for bringing up and I'm also new to the

32:45 ↗ document and I did find it well

32:47 ↗ organized I watched the way you had

32:48 ↗ parsed everything out it was really

32:50 ↗ impressed with the work that had been

32:51 ↗ done I think one thing that might help

32:53 ↗ is a header section like an executive

32:57 ↗ summary

32:58 ↗ this is the goals and the subheadings

33:01 ↗ not little points so that kind of like a

33:04 ↗ table of contents great suggestion what

33:12 ↗ are the next step for this document so

33:14 ↗ it goes to council and then this becomes

33:16 ↗ the strategic are the the parts

33:19 ↗ strategic plan the one that he currently

33:21 ↗ holding is now outdated so the policies

33:25 ↗ within it will be outdated so we will

33:28 ↗ update those and then two in the next

33:31 ↗ update of the comprehensive plans Park

33:34 ↗ element these same goals and policies go

33:36 ↗ into that so that's why there's somewhat

33:38 ↗ of a higher level policy than some other

33:41 ↗ design standards and stuff yeah so those

33:45 ↗ are the next steps and then again in

33:47 ↗ yeah four years we will be doing a lot

33:50 ↗ deeper dive into the goals and policies

33:52 ↗ as part of the park strategic plan

33:55 ↗ update I think we'll learn a lot in the

33:57 ↗ next four years

33:58 ↗ I would agree Jennifer said is council

34:03 ↗ will adopt them and then you will it'll

34:07 ↗ roll into the comp plan that you guys

34:09 ↗ will have the public hearing on I think

34:11 ↗ in October so it'll be the same ones

34:13 ↗ that you're already looking at but it'll

34:15 ↗ be part of the comp plan like you've

34:17 ↗ already seen the land-use element last

34:18 ↗ time it'll be part of that sort of

34:21 ↗ layered cake that worth feeding you so

34:23 ↗ that you don't get the whole thing at

34:24 ↗ the end so this will come back to you

34:33 ↗ so do we have to recommend that it goes

34:36 ↗ far the way it's written that'd be great

34:38 ↗ so we got we recommend by having a

34:43 ↗ somebody makes the motion before I did

34:46 ↗ know I need somebody to make a motion

34:50 ↗ before it it to counsel okay make a

35:00 ↗ motion to forward the goals and policies

35:02 ↗ as is to City Council would you like to

35:06 ↗ add the two things that have been added

35:09 ↗ or do you just want to assume that I

35:13 ↗ would like to add the two new goals all

35:17 ↗ see you know the goals will be in there

35:20 ↗ I mean Janice and Rob and Mandy had

35:23 ↗ brought up two things that your

35:25 ↗ suggestions are they do they need to be

35:30 ↗ addressed as that it's the matter of

35:33 ↗ formatting it sounds like the fire thing

35:35 ↗ we're waiting to see if that's going to

35:37 ↗ be addressed and I think there's there's

35:40 ↗ two ways we can address that we can wait

35:42 ↗ and do it it include it in the next

35:44 ↗ update wait and see how what the green

35:49 ↗ Issaquah in urban forest management plan

35:51 ↗ comes forth with and address it in the

35:54 ↗ next update or we can add that to a

35:57 ↗ policy now if you so choose I would just

35:59 ↗ like direction as to which policy you

36:01 ↗ would like it added to

36:09 ↗ about four years so Jennifer if we add

36:14 ↗ it to a policy today about the fire

36:18 ↗ would that make it more helpful for you

36:21 ↗ to go to for Tara and say we have a I

36:28 ↗ have to if I'm going to follow the right

36:29 ↗ there's a motion on the floor

36:36 ↗ exactly discussion for it so except in

36:40 ↗ four years right the motion we will have

36:44 ↗ a discussion after we have a second on

36:46 ↗ the motion I just wanted to know if you

36:48 ↗ wanted to add that my father you just

36:50 ↗ want to go and say I think we as his

36:53 ↗ recommendation for a table of contents

36:55 ↗ you so Jesus okay it's not a substance

36:59 ↗ of change in any way it's really just

37:02 ↗ convenience or formatting purposes okay

37:05 ↗ I just want to make everybody have their

37:08 ↗ they're saying so if you want to add

37:11 ↗ that there's a motion on the floor we're

37:15 ↗ in a second I'll second

37:19 ↗ and now we can open up for discussion

37:23 ↗ anybody want to have any further I guess

37:26 ↗ I should have probably mentioned that I

37:28 ↗ believe that Eastside Fire and Rescue is

37:31 ↗ in the process of doing a specific

37:35 ↗ examination of this not the Park area

37:39 ↗ but some of the residential areas as a

37:41 ↗ result of some concerns that have been

37:42 ↗ expressed by citizens and Eastside Fire

37:44 ↗ and Rescue is apparently from what I

37:48 ↗ have learned from them already done a

37:51 ↗ study on this subject and leave that

37:54 ↗ there is it is not an existential threat

37:56 ↗ so my concern excuse me when I suggested

38:01 ↗ using the word wildfire

38:07 ↗ in there along with other threats to the

38:11 ↗ to the park system it's because this is

38:15 ↗ this is an issue today that most of us

38:19 ↗ are not aware of again I wasn't and and

38:23 ↗ it's so I'm if if it's going to be

38:27 ↗ dressed in the terms of policy and

38:30 ↗ planning with a plan to do that and you

38:35 ↗ know that's fine but I just think it's

38:36 ↗ going to be overtaken by discussion soon

38:42 ↗ between the city and East Side Fire and

38:45 ↗ Rescue okay so you don't want to make an

38:47 ↗ amendment to that - I don't know what I

38:50 ↗ would make an amendment so I if we're

38:53 ↗ not going to put them if we can't put

38:54 ↗ the word in there as a another threat

38:59 ↗ it's just one word and then I'm just see

39:02 ↗ where it goes

39:09 ↗ motion to add the word and say well I

39:15 ↗ would make so I'm sorry we're still we

39:17 ↗ haven't voted on no this is discussion I

39:20 ↗ would like to in addition to

39:22 ↗ Commissioner Carl's recommendation also

39:27 ↗ a recommendation that the word wildfire

39:31 ↗ he identified as a one right there as

39:36 ↗ one of the threats

39:37 ↗ ooh Park that has to be taken into

39:40 ↗ consideration so there's that amendment

39:44 ↗ on the floor that's been seconded so if

39:46 ↗ you want to add that you can add an

39:49 ↗ amendment there's a motion separate

39:54 ↗ amendment yes there has to be approved

39:57 ↗ before then that that it will go into

39:59 ↗ the amendment there reserves right I

40:04 ↗ move that the word wildfire included in

40:09 ↗ the list of present lists of two items

40:13 ↗ that are identified as habitat

40:17 ↗ restoration open space

40:22 ↗ it's beef so these time you know I let

40:29 ↗ me so let me fall back in the groove

40:31 ↗ here I when I read that I was under the

40:33 ↗ impression that that was listening

40:36 ↗ specific threats to arc lamp partners it

40:43 ↗ doesn't use the word threat and it's

40:46 ↗ certainly part of habitat restoration so

40:48 ↗ I'm not sure that that was the place for

40:49 ↗ it so if I could just clarify okay I

40:53 ↗ know there's a motion on the floor so I

40:55 ↗ just wanted a point of clarification

40:57 ↗ last year when we came before the PPC

40:59 ↗ finding of fact was issued and these

41:02 ↗ were the three items included in that

41:04 ↗ finding of rag nice okay so okay so

41:12 ↗ we're back to the original motion any

41:15 ↗ other discussion I'll call for the vote

41:20 ↗ all those in favor of sending it this on

41:25 ↗ to the City Council with a suggestion

41:27 ↗ that there is a table of contents in the

41:30 ↗ beginning of the man may I okay all

41:36 ↗ right opposed hearing none we are

41:42 ↗ recommending it to go forward to City

41:44 ↗ Council as it is written

41:51 ↗ I think there are any other things that

41:56 ↗ you would like to up there I wanted to

41:59 ↗ ask Jen and um can you give us any

42:03 ↗ update on the tree canopy even just

42:06 ↗ squinty little but certainly as part of

42:09 ↗ the urban forest management plan we have

42:12 ↗ been tasked with doing a tree canopy

42:20 ↗ assessment that work has been contracted

42:23 ↗ and we have a draft plan before us we

42:26 ↗ are meeting with city administration

42:27 ↗ next week to review the document and

42:30 ↗ determine a path for presenting it to

42:35 ↗ Council so on so and the exciting part

42:39 ↗ for you all is there's goals and

42:41 ↗ policies in the Comprehensive Plan now

42:42 ↗ on the tree canopy in the land-use

42:44 ↗ element and they're the what the study

42:47 ↗ finds out will be integrated you know if

42:51 ↗ some of the numbers change or if we want

42:52 ↗ some of the numbers to change or if we

42:54 ↗ want something to change based on the

42:56 ↗ new study we'll get to we'll get to talk

43:00 ↗ about that so I'm really excited about

43:02 ↗ what the results are going to be so I

43:04 ↗ wanted you to be excited that that's

43:06 ↗ coming soon I can tell you it works

43:07 ↗ underway I have a question yes so when

43:11 ↗ you're looking at the tree canopy and

43:13 ↗ you're deciding how big it is you take

43:16 ↗ the hillsides and use that as the tree

43:20 ↗ canopy it is a balance it with you know

43:24 ↗ the rest of the area that's really good

43:27 ↗ question so our consultant team uses GIS

43:30 ↗ lidar a bunch of variations and it's

43:34 ↗ done citywide so it does include open

43:36 ↗ space built environment vacant lands

43:38 ↗ roads you name it every open waters are

43:41 ↗ taking a look at and there's areas that

43:44 ↗ are determined that our plantable and

43:46 ↗ non plantable areas and so those are

43:48 ↗ being assessed as well as there is a

43:50 ↗ comparison piece to the last study that

43:53 ↗ was conducted in 2012 so there will be a

43:56 ↗ piece

43:57 ↗ that which will likely lead to any

44:00 ↗ future policy conversations you may want

44:02 ↗ to have or may not want to have so more

44:06 ↗ to come on that but it's a really

44:08 ↗ fascinating GIS and as part of this work

44:11 ↗ the consultant also provided an online

44:14 ↗ tool that will have for a three year

44:16 ↗ period of time where you can go in and

44:19 ↗ see our tree canopy look at it

44:21 ↗ interactively as well as look at other

44:23 ↗ cities who have done it as well so all

44:26 ↗ is 50%

44:27 ↗ I believe it's 51 51 Randy madam chair

44:36 ↗ there's something that I had noted since

44:38 ↗ you brought the ill sides that I have

44:40 ↗ seen city map and that one of the

44:45 ↗ Development Commission means I don't

44:46 ↗ have any recollection of how or why I

44:48 ↗ came up but it specifically shows

44:52 ↗ portions of squawk Mountain that are

44:55 ↗ still owned a single-family residential

44:59 ↗ and it came up because there's

45:03 ↗ apparently a lot of the top squark

45:06 ↗ mountain that is zoned single-family

45:08 ↗ residential as it now so can we I think

45:12 ↗ that Matt that availability whether it's

45:14 ↗ just a link say here's the map or

45:16 ↗ whether we can see it if other

45:18 ↗ commissioners agree with me I was I

45:20 ↗ think I think the reaction I could

45:22 ↗ appropriately described as a surprise it

45:28 ↗ was a mess the zoning map or do you mean

45:30 ↗ the vacant parcels that are left it was

45:33 ↗ i we just got the thing in the mail on

45:37 ↗ the city that showed all of the

45:41 ↗ basically it said there can't be any

45:44 ↗ development because here's all the land

45:46 ↗ that is zoned as single-family

45:48 ↗ residential it's the whole mouth side

45:50 ↗ right but what I was referring to was a

45:53 ↗ colored map that showed

45:55 ↗ specific like a profile if you would of

46:00 ↗ a smart mount that showed areas in leave

46:05 ↗ his green that were owned single-family

46:08 ↗ residential that had not been there just

46:10 ↗ trees now they're open space park it's

46:13 ↗ not not parks that's the point they're

46:15 ↗ not so it's still privately owned and

46:17 ↗ could be developed yeah because it's

46:19 ↗ bacon okay so so far I look for specific

46:23 ↗ family residential okay but single

46:28 ↗ family I get yeah right yeah

46:30 ↗ so the point is that when it comes to

46:33 ↗ tree canopy and profile on the hilltops

46:35 ↗ and I think that's what the discussion

46:36 ↗ was when we were looking at something

46:38 ↗ one of the our buildings and so the

46:41 ↗ whole question was the code that says

46:43 ↗ you can't block the view of the

46:45 ↗ mountains of I have stories ever it is

46:49 ↗ right but I think it was in that context

46:52 ↗ that there was a map and it was

46:54 ↗ illustration that showed how much of the

46:57 ↗ mountain was still undeveloped but zone

47:00 ↗ single-family residential right because

47:02 ↗ I can tell you the whole thing is zone

47:04 ↗ single-family except for the cemetery

47:06 ↗ and you know the little park that the

47:10 ↗ cemetery and the same thing but the

47:12 ↗ higher up but we could certainly make a

47:14 ↗ map of what's vacant I okay that'd be

47:18 ↗ great

47:18 ↗ I think it would be interesting to us

47:19 ↗ but I think it's I think the way it was

47:21 ↗ brought up and I could be wrong because

47:22 ↗ it was a while back and I can you see it

47:25 ↗ sounds like something Lucy would have

47:26 ↗ presented I don't remember

47:29 ↗ okay if I could and I it's probably on

47:32 ↗ the city website somewhere I look for

47:35 ↗ I'm the last guy it narrows it down

47:37 ↗ somewhat rain but I know we could make a

47:39 ↗ map of the vacant land that's left on I

47:43 ↗ think because a lot of its crew in

47:44 ↗ critical areas though because it's strip

47:46 ↗ slope so you couldn't even though it's

47:48 ↗ vacant it's not developable because it's

47:50 ↗ steep but we could certainly figure that

47:52 ↗ out and that's a key point it's sewn

47:55 ↗ single-family residential it's

47:56 ↗ undeveloped it's in private ownership

47:58 ↗ but it probably couldn't be developed

48:00 ↗ because of the slopes correct but

48:02 ↗ there's still some of it it isn't that

48:04 ↗ way so it's just it's just a

48:07 ↗ it's tuck into so I think when you're

48:10 ↗ doing your canopy listen that's the

48:14 ↗ thing is if it's still zoned

48:16 ↗ single-family and it can be developed

48:21 ↗ then you can't count that necessarily

48:24 ↗ those trees as part of the tree canopy

48:26 ↗ yeah you could count them today you can

48:29 ↗ count it today and then in the next

48:30 ↗ update it should it be developed and

48:32 ↗ let's say all the trees were taken down

48:34 ↗ then it would be addressed in the next

48:35 ↗ update and the good news for squawk

48:37 ↗ Mountain is so much of it as steep slope

48:39 ↗ that hopefully the trees are gonna still

48:41 ↗ be there because they can't be they

48:43 ↗ shouldn't be removed because they're in

48:45 ↗ critical area well I just think it you

48:47 ↗ can look at it that well that might be

48:54 ↗ developed and if it is then you're gonna

48:58 ↗ have to put trees someplace else to make

49:01 ↗ them under that 51% and it's just

49:03 ↗ something that you know you can't wait

49:05 ↗ until somebody comes in and tears down

49:07 ↗ the tree is you and still maintain your

49:10 ↗ 51% you have to make plans of what you

49:14 ↗ might want it should be a discussion

49:16 ↗ right and I think part of the policies

49:18 ↗ that we put together we the PBC is

49:20 ↗ talking about city property that we can

49:23 ↗ start planting now that are available

49:25 ↗ for planting now because we don't have

49:27 ↗ control over the private areas I

49:29 ↗ understand but it can be developed the

49:34 ↗ private areas can be developed and so

49:37 ↗ you're gonna have to look at what can we

49:39 ↗ do if that happen or it can be acquired

49:41 ↗ by for more or that open space for

49:44 ↗ stability I think that's that would be

49:48 ↗ the ultimate terrible outcome is just to

49:51 ↗ say okay this much is still zone

49:53 ↗ single-family residential as much and

49:57 ↗ this percentage of that is in critical

50:00 ↗ areas

50:01 ↗ we don't really have to worry about that

50:03 ↗ then there's this territory that is not

50:09 ↗ critical but its own single-family

50:11 ↗ residence be a good thing for us to have

50:13 ↗ justice upon and and and for the city I

50:16 ↗ mean for the policy planning policy

50:18 ↗ thing we could we could at some point in

50:21 ↗ the future if this if this comes up and

50:23 ↗ we've got a lot of development pressure

50:25 ↗ that's going to continue forever and

50:27 ↗ ever we could

50:30 ↗ recommend that this be considered her

50:33 ↗ annexation or acquisition for open space

50:39 ↗ I think would awareness of that Widow

50:42 ↗ would allow us to look at future policy

50:45 ↗ so not to spoil anything but I think a

50:49 ↗ lot of your questions when this comes

50:50 ↗ forward will be answered in the document

50:53 ↗ and the worker and the interactive tool

50:55 ↗ I think yeah I think a lot of these

50:56 ↗ questions will be addressed we just

50:59 ↗ aren't ready to unveil the draft at this

51:02 ↗ time ahead of giving an update to

51:04 ↗ administration are you familiar with

51:06 ↗ that doctor that map there was that

51:08 ↗ illustration that I'm talking about

51:10 ↗ I have saw it one time it made a

51:12 ↗ difference

51:13 ↗ yeah if you still have it I'm gonna go

51:17 ↗ on a search to okay for it I would go

51:20 ↗ right over to Lucy and say Lucy Randy's

51:22 ↗ got this map in his head and if we can't

51:24 ↗ find it we'll make a new one and we'll

51:26 ↗ get it to be close to what it is that

51:28 ↗ you're thinking yeah should be shown I

51:31 ↗ think that there's another enough

51:33 ↗ planners looking at fine I just think

51:39 ↗ it's a very it's a good little thing for

51:42 ↗ us they have Frank that we can refer to

51:43 ↗ it if if and I should say when that

51:46 ↗ comes up as a policy issue remaining

51:49 ↗ issue right and if I think of it

51:51 ↗ tomorrow I'll send out the policy that

51:53 ↗ is on the urban tree the tree canopy so

51:55 ↗ you all can see what's covered and

51:57 ↗ what's not covered and so be thinking of

51:59 ↗ when the the new study comes out what

52:02 ↗ you'd want to address with this is

52:06 ↗ something like this is going to be

52:07 ↗ available to the public you don't need

52:11 ↗ to go look for it

52:12 ↗ okay but I just think it's something

52:14 ↗ that wouldn't good for us to have a good

52:16 ↗ yeah yeah and it goes to council in

52:19 ↗ September did I see I don't know that's

52:22 ↗ part of our conversation with

52:23 ↗ administration next week is what the

52:25 ↗ future path for that so not like I

52:27 ↗ thought I saw it on Tisha's calendar for

52:29 ↗ September but that might just think

52:30 ↗ there's a placeholder look at that

52:32 ↗ yeah we need to talk about that my no

52:34 ↗ sorry

52:35 ↗ oh it's all in firing minds want to know

52:39 ↗ so your next stay tuned and come up in a

52:42 ↗ planning policy Commission meeting so

52:45 ↗ hey it just says that we are interested

52:50 ↗ in creating something good for the city

52:54 ↗ okay so anything else nothing else when

52:57 ↗ we start a conversation on I think from

53:00 ↗ me thank you thank you I don't have a

53:04 ↗ packet I gave my packet away so I'm

53:06 ↗ gonna oh all town codominance this is

53:11 ↗ gonna be exciting because you guys just

53:13 ↗ finished the plan last year and it got

53:15 ↗ adopted so it's gonna be fun to actually

53:18 ↗ start implementing that the plan that

53:21 ↗ you just did so that's going to be

53:23 ↗ exciting and do I have just a straw poll

53:27 ↗ RSVP and who might be here on August I

53:32 ↗ have one too I

53:35 ↗ you'll be Joan okay Tom I think I'll be

53:38 ↗ tentative a strong tentative strong okay

53:41 ↗ and Ron will you be biking somewhere

53:46 ↗ tonight I did for two months okay okay

53:52 ↗ no worries then we'll put you as a

53:54 ↗ strong tentative for August and

53:58 ↗ September okay and Randy yes yes you'll

54:01 ↗ be there a strong yes you'll be there

54:03 ↗ excellent we got a quorum then thank you

54:05 ↗ and if you have any questions or

54:08 ↗ thoughts feel free to email me anytime

54:10 ↗ I'm always there so hearing no other

54:14 ↗ input close the meeting at 7:27 thank

54:20 ↗ you

54:25 ↗ you

54:28 ↗ you

54:30 ↗ you

54:36 ↗ you

Approved minutes

Extracted from the next meeting's packet, where this meeting's minutes were approved as a consent-calendar attachment.

Open PDF

Attendance

Council / Members (3)

Thomas Haskins

Alt. Brad Book Commissioners Not Present (Excused): Joy Lewis Bill Rinehart Robin Beukers

Alt