Planning Policy Commission - Special Meeting · Wednesday, February 12, 2020 · City Council Digest

1. CALL TO ORDER

Commission Membership

packet pp.3

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 – Vacant see IMC 18.03. 2020 – Robin Beukers 2020 – Vacant 2020 – Vacant

2. REGULAR BUSINESS

Proposed Olde Town Architectural Standards, (D)

Christen Leeson, Senior Planner Samantha Suter, Metta Urban Design · packet pp.5–11

Topics: Land Use

Open packet at p.5 ↗

Staff report:

In December 2018, the City Council approved the updated Olde Town Subarea Plan. Included in the Plan are the following goal and policies.

3. REPORTS

Olde Town: Commission (PPC) and community members participated in the walking tour and workshop on Olde Town Architectural Standards and Design Guidelines. See website for more info on this major project. drop-in open house on Olde Town Traffic Calming from 5:30 - 7:00 p.m. in the Eagle Room, 130 E. Sunset Way. will meet for a study session on Olde Town Land Use Code Amendments recommended by PPC on Sept. 26, 2019. Council action is anticipated on Mar. 16, 2020. At the same meeting, potential traffic calming solutions, data, and community feedback will be presented to the City Council

Topics: Land UseTransportation

4. OTHER BUSINESS / ANNOUNCEMENTS

Upcoming Schedule

packet pp.13

Open packet at p.13 ↗

Staff report:

OTHER BUSINESS / ANNOUNCEMENTS a) 2020 PPC Schedule (tentative) (updated 2-4-20) All meetings located in Council Chambers unless noted January 2020 September 2020 1/9/20 Training and Mayor visit 9/10/20 Public Hearing: 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendments 1/11/20 Saturday 9:00 am to noon Olde Town Walking Tour and Workshop (Olde Town Architectural Standards/Design Guidelines) 9/24/20 To be Determined

2808 segments

0:26 ↗ are you

0:30 ↗ Ron if I could get your attention at

0:35 ↗ seven o'clock and I would like to call

0:37 ↗ the meeting the joint meeting the

0:39 ↗ Planning Policy Commission and the

0:40 ↗ Development Commission we're officially

0:43 ↗ called to order great thank you

0:48 ↗ I'm going to switch directions here a

0:49 ↗ little bit because you're pointed that

0:50 ↗ way I'm so glad that all of you could

0:53 ↗ make it out here today my name is

0:55 ↗ Kristin Lisa and I'm a senior planner

0:58 ↗ with the development services department

0:59 ↗ tonight we are here to talk about how we

1:03 ↗ will update an approach updating and

1:06 ↗ developing new architectural standards

1:08 ↗ for Old Town so I'm gonna walk you

1:11 ↗ through a little imps would say

1:15 ↗ here we go so tonight we're gonna talk a

1:18 ↗ little bit about the project background

1:19 ↗ how we got here the areas that this

1:22 ↗ would apply to any engagement that we've

1:25 ↗ done thus far we'll talk about the

1:28 ↗ updates to the existing standards that

1:30 ↗ we have in place and then we'll talk

1:31 ↗ about discussions that we've had about

1:33 ↗ potential new standards for the

1:35 ↗ single-family duplex district which

1:37 ↗ would include all structures in there

1:38 ↗ single family and duplexes and then if

1:41 ↗ we have time we'll bring up some other

1:44 ↗ topics like gateways and accessory

1:46 ↗ dwelling units and additions there's a

1:49 ↗ lot to talk about

1:50 ↗ tonight and if we can't make it through

1:52 ↗ everything that's okay we're happy to

1:54 ↗ come back and continue the discussion

1:56 ↗ that's not a problem

1:58 ↗ I want to let you know kind of - why

2:00 ↗ you're here PPC has become very familiar

2:03 ↗ with Old Town between the update of the

2:07 ↗ old town suburbia plan and the old town

2:11 ↗ land use code amendments that are in

2:12 ↗ process and it will ultimately be making

2:16 ↗ a recommendation to City Council about

2:18 ↗ these standards and the Development

2:20 ↗ Commission went through the central

2:23 ↗ Issaquah architectural standards process

2:25 ↗ so you're familiar with how it works

2:26 ↗ what to look for how to implement what

2:29 ↗ kind of works for developers and the

2:31 ↗ Commission and staff and can help us

2:33 ↗ through that part of it so that's what

2:34 ↗ we brought you all together this is the

2:37 ↗ very first night that we talked about it

2:38 ↗ with you all we'll see how it goes wrong

2:40 ↗ way

2:42 ↗ we go so for those who have not been

2:46 ↗ involved since the beginning I'm going

2:49 ↗ in the Wayback Machine in 1999 we

2:52 ↗ adopted the old town sub area plan it

2:55 ↗ was not touched again until 2009 when we

2:59 ↗ were asked to move remove any references

3:02 ↗ to the bypass so that's all that was

3:05 ↗ done in 2013 we finished all of our work

3:09 ↗ a seven-year process on a developing a

3:13 ↗ central Issaquah plan and a central

3:15 ↗ Issaquah central Issaquah development

3:16 ↗ and design standards so by 2014 council

3:19 ↗ said enough we need to go back and focus

3:22 ↗ on Old Town they put forward three

3:25 ↗ council goals two had to do with traffic

3:28 ↗ and circulation in Old Town and one had

3:30 ↗ to do with Old Town vitality so in 2015

3:34 ↗ mayor Fred Butler appointed a task force

3:36 ↗ and they focused primarily on the

3:41 ↗ commercial areas of Old Town and came up

3:43 ↗ with recommendations the recommendations

3:46 ↗ included number one update the old town

3:50 ↗ plan and the old town design standards

3:52 ↗ to create a consistent and well-designed

3:55 ↗ streetscape or front street and work

4:00 ↗ with the Downtown Association to help

4:02 ↗ them increase partnerships with

4:03 ↗ community groups and regional groups so

4:05 ↗ we continue to work with dia in 2017 we

4:10 ↗ adopted a downtown streetscape plan

4:12 ↗ that's slowly but surely being

4:14 ↗ implemented and we are now doing we did

4:20 ↗ the Old Town plan and now we're working

4:22 ↗ on the design standards and some code

4:24 ↗ amendments

4:27 ↗ the old town plan during that process we

4:31 ↗ held four public meetings we took it we

4:35 ↗ took it to council council saw the task

4:36 ↗ force recommendations City Council said

4:39 ↗ this is great but we need a little bit

4:40 ↗ more focus on residential because it's

4:42 ↗ not talked about at all so when we began

4:45 ↗ updating the Old Town plan there was a

4:46 ↗ lot of focus there because there had not

4:48 ↗ been before so we had four open houses

4:50 ↗ one online survey in which we got over

4:54 ↗ 450 responses and then we had six

4:56 ↗ Planning Policy commission meetings and

4:58 ↗ six City Council meetings

5:02 ↗ part of the plan we have our goals or

5:05 ↗ policies or vision we also had

5:07 ↗ implementation actions one of the goals

5:09 ↗ said we want to preserve the maintain

5:12 ↗ the traditional character and scale of

5:14 ↗ the cultural and business district in

5:16 ↗ Sunset neighborhoods while allowing them

5:18 ↗ to still grow and evolve policies were

5:21 ↗ update the CBD development and

5:23 ↗ architectural standards and update the

5:26 ↗ multifamily high development in our

5:28 ↗ Casilla architectural standards along

5:30 ↗ east sunset way in the plan we included

5:34 ↗ an action plan first action item for

5:36 ↗ under immediate actions there are three

5:38 ↗ different ones

5:39 ↗ immediate action short term actions and

5:41 ↗ longer-term actions under immediate

5:43 ↗ actions it said new architectural

5:46 ↗ standards and design guidelines in CBD

5:48 ↗ MF h which is multi-family high east on

5:52 ↗ east sunset way only and single-family

5:55 ↗ duplex zones though currently we have we

6:01 ↗ have design standards Oldtown design

6:03 ↗ standards which apply to the areas that

6:04 ↗ you see here they is this work if it

6:08 ↗ does so they apply to the cultural and

6:12 ↗ business district right here

6:14 ↗ multifamily high district an East sunset

6:18 ↗ way only they also apply to the

6:21 ↗ multifamily medium district so you may

6:23 ↗ recall when I had said the

6:24 ↗ implementation actions and the policies

6:26 ↗ did not include updating MFM but right

6:29 ↗ now our plan is to leave that in there

6:32 ↗ thinking of us an oversight we plan on

6:34 ↗ leaving that in there unless we hear

6:36 ↗ otherwise so we're just going to include

6:38 ↗ it as part of our conversation for now

6:41 ↗ so this is what our standards look like

6:44 ↗ they were adopted in 2000 or 2001 do you

6:47 ↗ tell someone they were updated this is

6:49 ↗ what they look like they cover things

6:51 ↗ like windows roof lines articulation

6:54 ↗ walkthroughs or pass throughs and that

6:58 ↗ kind of thing those really just need to

7:00 ↗ be refreshed and updated the old town

7:02 ↗ plan also says to preserve residential

7:04 ↗ neighborhoods preserve the scale and

7:07 ↗ character of the residential

7:08 ↗ neighborhoods while ensuring a variety

7:10 ↗ of housing that meets the community

7:11 ↗ needs the goal adopt architectural

7:14 ↗ standards and updated development

7:16 ↗ standards consistent with the character

7:17 ↗ and style of existing residences again

7:20 ↗ the implementation action says to do it

7:23 ↗ for the single-family duplex zone this

7:25 ↗ was picked because this is really what

7:27 ↗ we're the oldest part that is the

7:30 ↗ coldest part of the Township was located

7:32 ↗ and it has this grid system and it feels

7:34 ↗ like it is connected to the cultural

7:36 ↗ business district and the multifamily

7:37 ↗ streets that is why that was selected so

7:41 ↗ should we do

7:43 ↗ single-family include single-family

7:45 ↗ duplex that is all of the goldish area

7:50 ↗ it's here it would be included in the

7:54 ↗ standards

7:57 ↗ their outreach an august 29th and 2019

8:01 ↗ we had a stakeholder luncheon we had

8:03 ↗ nine people attend it was a good pretty

8:06 ↗ good mix of property owners business

8:08 ↗ owners and people residences people who

8:10 ↗ lived here and what we talked about both

8:13 ↗ things we talked about the CBD and

8:15 ↗ multi-family the outtake from that was

8:17 ↗ that the standards are pretty good right

8:18 ↗ now

8:18 ↗ what we have is good they address the

8:21 ↗ right elements we just need they need to

8:23 ↗ be updated and refreshed we also talked

8:25 ↗ about single family with single family

8:27 ↗ the biggest concerns seem to be with the

8:29 ↗ recent increases in height and bulk are

8:32 ↗ the primary factors that affect

8:33 ↗ character they like the idea of

8:35 ↗ diversity in the neighborhood but they

8:37 ↗ want to maintain the residential old

8:38 ↗ towns that collect a character that's

8:40 ↗ there on January 11th on a very cold

8:43 ↗ very rainy and windy day we had about 40

8:47 ↗ people show up for a walking tour and a

8:50 ↗ workshop it was really fun why we were

8:55 ↗ there we made a brief presentation and

8:57 ↗ then we talked about these different

8:59 ↗ elements which we'll talk about in just

9:00 ↗ a little bit we all they all met in

9:03 ↗ subgroup in smaller groups and then at

9:06 ↗ the end of the presentation got up and

9:07 ↗ talked about what they thought and this

9:10 ↗ is kind of how it played out there this

9:12 ↗ is what they worked on so I am going to

9:15 ↗ hand it over now to our consultant

9:19 ↗ Samantha Souter who's with meta urban

9:20 ↗ design she has done this type of work

9:22 ↗ before and she's going to walk you

9:24 ↗ through the workshop she's going to walk

9:26 ↗ you through some of our thoughts on the

9:27 ↗ existing standards and then what we

9:29 ↗ heard from the workshop and we'd really

9:30 ↗ like to get your feedback tonight on are

9:32 ↗ we headed in the right direction is this

9:35 ↗ something that can be implementable does

9:37 ↗ this do what the plan tells us to do

9:39 ↗ that's what we're looking for tonight

9:40 ↗ okay

9:44 ↗ thanks Kristen first of all I'm really

9:50 ↗ excited to be here so thank you for

9:52 ↗ welcoming me back I think this is a

9:55 ↗ great community so I'm happy to be part

9:58 ↗ of this effort I think it's really

10:01 ↗ exciting so I just wanted to start with

10:04 ↗ that so Kristen talked about you know

10:07 ↗ what we can't hear me is that better

10:10 ↗ thank you Kristen talked about what

10:13 ↗ we're doing I want to give you a little

10:15 ↗ more insight into how we're approaching

10:17 ↗ this effort so the the primary objective

10:21 ↗ is we want to have a final document that

10:24 ↗ is usable we want both staff to be able

10:28 ↗ to implement it and we want applicants

10:30 ↗ property owners to understand what the

10:33 ↗ regulations are that's the primary

10:35 ↗ objective of what we're doing here with

10:37 ↗ this effort to do that we're going to

10:39 ↗ tweak a few topics Kristen mentioned

10:42 ↗ that there's a zoning code update that's

10:45 ↗ in the process right now so we want to

10:46 ↗ ensure that the new standards are in

10:49 ↗ alignment with the new zoning updates

10:52 ↗ also we want to make sure that we're not

10:54 ↗ getting to down the weeds of having

10:57 ↗ guidelines versus standards so without

11:00 ↗ going on a tangent standards are very

11:03 ↗ cut and dry it's a yes or no it's do

11:05 ↗ this not that guidelines can be a little

11:08 ↗ squishy or a little more subjective so

11:11 ↗ at this point we want to go down the

11:13 ↗ path of having something that's really

11:15 ↗ cut and dry again this goes to the

11:17 ↗ implementation focus and the the

11:19 ↗ usability aspect especially with the

11:23 ↗ single-family area this is uncharted

11:26 ↗ waters for Issaquah no other

11:28 ↗ single-family area in the city has

11:30 ↗ standards right now so that's why we

11:32 ↗ want to take a step in that direction

11:34 ↗ see how it works and then the plan is

11:37 ↗ within a year to revise them and update

11:40 ↗ them if needed potentially add new

11:42 ↗ guidelines at that time or recalibrate

11:45 ↗ depending on how these new standards are

11:47 ↗ received

11:50 ↗ let's see and finally part of the

11:52 ↗ creating a usable document is a

11:55 ↗ refreshing refreshing the document so

11:58 ↗ Kristen showed you some pictures of what

12:00 ↗ it looks like now there's been a lot of

12:03 ↗ changes just in the profession in the

12:05 ↗ past 20 years so we want to make sure

12:07 ↗ that it's in alignment with what we see

12:09 ↗ throughout the country in terms of best

12:11 ↗ practices for standards and guidelines

12:13 ↗ does this make sense from an overall

12:15 ↗ perspective what we're trying to do okay

12:17 ↗ great um in your packet we included an

12:23 ↗ outline and from the highest level most

12:29 ↗ of what you see in that outline is not

12:31 ↗ new content it's taking the existing

12:33 ↗ standards and reorganizing them in a way

12:36 ↗ again so it's it's more usable for the

12:39 ↗ bo staff and the end user so on the

12:42 ↗ screen you can see the gray box purpose

12:45 ↗ and applicability and then part one all

12:47 ↗ that is existing content I'll go through

12:51 ↗ a couple tweaks to that content in the

12:54 ↗ next couple slides but the biggest

12:58 ↗ change for part one is instead of having

13:00 ↗ a chapter for the CBD and a chapter for

13:03 ↗ multifamily we're separating those into

13:06 ↗ four so there's a general site design

13:08 ↗ general building design and then

13:10 ↗ specific standards for CBD and

13:13 ↗ multi-family so if you're familiar with

13:15 ↗ the existing standards you're probably

13:18 ↗ aware that about half of the guidelines

13:20 ↗ are repeated between CBD and

13:23 ↗ multi-family but there are some minor

13:25 ↗ inconsistencies between the two and that

13:27 ↗ just is as you update the document over

13:30 ↗ time or as you're drafting it if you

13:31 ↗ have the same standard in two places it

13:34 ↗ can get kind of complicated to make sure

13:36 ↗ that they're saying the same thing so

13:38 ↗ that's what we're seeing is just kind of

13:40 ↗ a best practice to avoid that repetition

13:42 ↗ only say something once and then have

13:45 ↗ some cross references and then again if

13:49 ↗ this I think the most exciting part is

13:51 ↗ this new content that we're talking

13:53 ↗ about which is part two and that's shown

13:55 ↗ in pink we'll talk more about that in a

13:58 ↗ moment so I'm just gonna march through

14:01 ↗ these overall

14:03 ↗ chapters four part one and I'll point

14:05 ↗ out the topics that need some refinement

14:08 ↗ are some tweaking just so you're

14:10 ↗ perfectly aware of what's changing and

14:12 ↗ what's not changing you'll see the

14:15 ↗ topics in pink are the ones I'm just

14:17 ↗ going to highlight as we march through

14:19 ↗ the outline the first one is gateways so

14:24 ↗ in the plan it talks about having these

14:25 ↗ gateways and then the existing guidance

14:28 ↗ in the standards I think needs a little

14:30 ↗ revisiting so if we have time at the end

14:33 ↗ of the presentation we'll talk about

14:35 ↗ that in depth today

14:36 ↗ if not we'll come back and have a deeper

14:39 ↗ conversation because we want to make

14:41 ↗ sure that we're we're getting that that

14:44 ↗ topic right the second one I want to

14:46 ↗ point out is the landscape elements

14:49 ↗ Kristin mentioned that there's a

14:50 ↗ streetscape plan we want to look at both

14:53 ↗ of these documents together to make sure

14:55 ↗ that they're working together again we

14:57 ↗ don't want them to be in conflict and

14:59 ↗ since the streetscape plan is relatively

15:02 ↗ new we want to look at the section in

15:04 ↗ the guideline and the standards that has

15:07 ↗ very similar content and make sure

15:09 ↗ they're saying the same thing or that

15:11 ↗ they're supporting each other we don't

15:13 ↗ want to have conflicts we don't want to

15:15 ↗ have redundancy we want to make sure

15:17 ↗ that each tool is kind of functioning as

15:20 ↗ needed so that's something we're going

15:23 ↗ to look at as a group the I think

15:28 ↗ biggest topic for staff in terms of

15:31 ↗ challenge for implementation is color so

15:34 ↗ that's a big topic we want to get your

15:36 ↗ input on today this is some pages from

15:40 ↗ the existing standards right now so it

15:43 ↗ talks about how to use color has some of

15:46 ↗ these you know a narrative explaining

15:49 ↗ why this is important to Old Town and

15:51 ↗ then how to use it in terms of having a

15:53 ↗ primary and secondary color but then if

15:58 ↗ you want to figure out what colors to

15:59 ↗ use you actually have to go into the

16:01 ↗ planning department and you have to look

16:03 ↗ at these boards so that's pretty

16:06 ↗ difficult both for staff and for

16:08 ↗ applicants to figure out what colors are

16:11 ↗ allowed to use um we had a good laugh

16:14 ↗ when we looked at this

16:17 ↗ so what we heard when we had the the

16:20 ↗ stakeholder lunch is that the colors

16:22 ↗ aren't a problem

16:24 ↗ it's just how they're being implemented

16:26 ↗ and in that communication between staff

16:28 ↗ and the applicant we want to make sure

16:30 ↗ that the process is easier for everybody

16:33 ↗ to use and there's no ambiguity so this

16:36 ↗ was just taking you know eyedropper of

16:38 ↗ the existing palette and tiling it up

16:40 ↗ here just so you could get a better idea

16:42 ↗ of what we're talking about because this

16:44 ↗ is pretty hard to understand even you

16:47 ↗ know for us looking looking at it

16:50 ↗ another thing that we heard from the

16:52 ↗ community is they want this to be

16:54 ↗ updated and looked at more frequently so

16:57 ↗ I think that what we heard was probably

16:59 ↗ every five years or something they want

17:01 ↗ to revisit the color palette just to

17:03 ↗ make sure that you know depending on how

17:06 ↗ development trends are going that the

17:08 ↗ the color palette is in line with

17:11 ↗ community priorities and values so just

17:14 ↗ to orient you we have the allowed colors

17:17 ↗ these would be allowed for what we're

17:19 ↗ calling primary so just the cladding of

17:21 ↗ the building or trim or accent features

17:24 ↗ and then the roof colors which it's kind

17:27 ↗ of hard to see on this projection but

17:30 ↗ there are some Reds and some blues in

17:32 ↗ there

17:32 ↗ but then at the bottom are the

17:34 ↗ prohibited colors which the standards

17:37 ↗ talk about neon and metallic colors they

17:39 ↗ don't want to see and again this applies

17:42 ↗ to the current CBD and multi-family area

17:46 ↗ and the I think the last topic that

17:50 ↗ we're tweaking is scale and massing for

17:53 ↗ CBD part of the the land-use update or

17:58 ↗ the the zoning ordinance update is to

18:00 ↗ lower the height so right now it can

18:02 ↗ buildings can go up to 60 feet so the

18:05 ↗ current standards have above two storeys

18:07 ↗ you have to do these upper storey

18:09 ↗ setbacks so I believe every story above

18:12 ↗ two feet your upper floors have to be

18:15 ↗ setback six feet so what we're thinking

18:18 ↗ makes sense is to do away with that

18:21 ↗ because now instead of going up to 60

18:23 ↗ feet you can only go up to 45 feet and

18:26 ↗ of how many stories was it before

18:30 ↗ worries before but now so it was 65 feet

18:33 ↗ sorry correction

18:34 ↗ it was 65 feet with the step backs and

18:38 ↗ 45 feet I believe is a base and now what

18:41 ↗ we're proposing is 40 feet maximum

18:44 ↗ height so or four three stories

18:47 ↗ whichever is shorter so that's why we

18:49 ↗ think the upper story step-back tool

18:51 ↗ doesn't really apply anymore based on

18:53 ↗ that that zoning update

18:57 ↗ then lastly in terms of multifamily once

19:00 ↗ we reach FL some of the topics to move

19:03 ↗ some topics into the site design and the

19:06 ↗ building design this is what's left and

19:09 ↗ we're not proposing any updates or

19:11 ↗ tweaks to the existing multifamily

19:13 ↗ districts before I move to the

19:17 ↗ single-family topics do you guys have

19:20 ↗ any questions or comments just about the

19:22 ↗ overall organization and the approach

19:27 ↗ all right so again the the single-family

19:33 ↗ standards would apply to that that gold

19:36 ↗ area and this is the single-family

19:40 ↗ duplexes owning but it you're moving

19:42 ↗ around old town it's the single-family

19:44 ↗ neighborhood area I know sometimes that

19:46 ↗ can be confusing and this applies to new

19:50 ↗ construction and it we expect it will

19:54 ↗ apply to some additions and possibly

19:57 ↗ renovations but we want to get your

20:00 ↗ input on where exactly do we want to

20:03 ↗ draw that line if it's a you know small

20:06 ↗ modest addition do the standards need to

20:09 ↗ apply or are we talking about you know

20:11 ↗ if most of the house is changing is that

20:14 ↗ when the standards need to need to apply

20:18 ↗ we'll talk a little bit more about that

20:20 ↗ later

20:21 ↗ and again this approach we're calling it

20:25 ↗ this slow-burn approach where we want to

20:28 ↗ start first with the most important

20:30 ↗ topics identify what is most important

20:33 ↗ to the community and to you all and to

20:36 ↗ write really clear strong standards to

20:38 ↗ ensure that that happens and then

20:40 ↗ revisit it in a year to see if there's

20:43 ↗ any refinements or any other guidelines

20:47 ↗ we can add to that these are the topics

20:52 ↗ we talked to the community at the

20:54 ↗ meeting we simplified it into these

20:57 ↗ three buckets overall size and shape

20:59 ↗ scaling elements and then the site so

21:02 ↗ pretty much everything but the building

21:04 ↗ and I'll walk you through these and

21:06 ↗ explain what we heard from the community

21:08 ↗ and then what we're planning on doing

21:09 ↗ with the feedback so in terms of

21:13 ↗ architectural style we went on the walk

21:16 ↗ audit and we looked at the range of

21:19 ↗ houses throughout the neighborhood and

21:21 ↗ this is why I think Old Town is so great

21:24 ↗ it's almost as gallery of of houses of

21:27 ↗ you know American architecture you have

21:31 ↗ the the older Pioneer style house down

21:34 ↗ you know through the beautiful craftsman

21:37 ↗ some really great mid-century examples

21:39 ↗ and then you can see some of the

21:41 ↗ the newer construction has some of those

21:44 ↗ odd are ODEs to the these earlier styles

21:49 ↗ that we see as a project team we were

21:52 ↗ looking at different styles and tried to

21:56 ↗ see if there was any one predominant

21:57 ↗ style of architecture and we realized

22:01 ↗ that the predominant character is that

22:03 ↗ it's eclectic

22:04 ↗ there's a mix and that's really cool so

22:07 ↗ as we talk to the community about that

22:09 ↗ what we heard is that they don't want to

22:11 ↗ regulate style I'm so I know some of you

22:14 ↗ are familiar with the central it's a

22:17 ↗ quoi standards where it actually

22:19 ↗ regulates a style you must choose one of

22:21 ↗ these what we heard is that in Old Town

22:24 ↗ that's probably not appropriate because

22:26 ↗ it's so eclectic but the community wants

22:29 ↗ to focus on the most important aspects

22:31 ↗ to maintain the character and I think

22:37 ↗ the biggest thing we heard was that

22:38 ↗ massing is probably the most important

22:42 ↗ tool to maintain this character people

22:46 ↗ want to prohibit you know just having a

22:48 ↗ really big box like this and they'd

22:51 ↗ rather see something with a little more

22:53 ↗ nuance a little more variety in the

22:55 ↗ overall shape so we talk about that in

22:57 ↗ terms of scale reduction or mass

23:00 ↗ reduction in terms of the standards

23:04 ↗ we're working right now to figure out

23:05 ↗ exactly what does that mean how wide can

23:08 ↗ your building be before you need to have

23:10 ↗ a shift in plain how long can your roof

23:12 ↗ be before you need to have an accent

23:15 ↗ gable or something like that those are

23:17 ↗ topics we're exploring right now but I

23:19 ↗ think having some of these standards

23:22 ↗ codified is in line with what we heard

23:24 ↗ from the community we also talked about

23:28 ↗ roof types and looked at a variety of

23:30 ↗ precedent imagery showing multiple

23:34 ↗ different types of roofs roofs

23:36 ↗ you know steep roofs shallow roofs and

23:39 ↗ everything in between and what we heard

23:43 ↗ was the only thing that really doesn't

23:44 ↗ fit in our flat roofs and what we heard

23:49 ↗ is that flat roofs are more in line with

23:50 ↗ this modern architecture and while these

23:54 ↗ are really great

23:55 ↗ beautiful examples it's it's out of

23:57 ↗ character with Old Town so we heard

24:00 ↗ pretty clearly that people want to

24:02 ↗ prohibit having flat roofs

24:06 ↗ we talked about materials and some

24:09 ↗ standards get really specific in terms

24:12 ↗ of materials what we heard was that it's

24:15 ↗ not so much the actual material whether

24:17 ↗ it's wood or cement board or metal but

24:22 ↗ it's more the appearance and then having

24:25 ↗ durable materials those are the

24:27 ↗ priorities and people want to allow

24:31 ↗ flexibility to ensure that we're not

24:33 ↗ creating standards that are overly

24:35 ↗ burdensome for people we want to make

24:38 ↗ sure that the suite of materials that

24:40 ↗ people can choose our cost-effective and

24:43 ↗ practical

24:45 ↗ so color again this is the one topic

24:49 ↗ that I think we had the widest range of

24:52 ↗ feedback from the community

24:53 ↗ some people said no don't regulate it

24:56 ↗ this is a community of artists and we

24:59 ↗ want to celebrate that other people had

25:02 ↗ a little more feedback in terms of you

25:04 ↗ know perhaps we want to explore limiting

25:06 ↗ the amount of colors or prohibiting the

25:09 ↗ really bright neon or fluorescent colors

25:14 ↗ so we we looked at the color palette or

25:18 ↗ how the central Issaquah regulates color

25:21 ↗ and without going too much down that

25:25 ↗ road basically it allows earth tones in

25:28 ↗ central Issaquah but anything but the

25:32 ↗ pure hue so as long as you have a little

25:34 ↗ bit of white or gray or black into the

25:36 ↗ color as long as it's a little more

25:38 ↗ subdued you can can do it

25:42 ↗ so that might be something we want to

25:44 ↗ explore that that might be a balance

25:46 ↗ between you know letting people have fun

25:50 ↗ with with color without overly

25:52 ↗ regulating it

25:55 ↗ some specifics that we did here with

25:57 ↗ color is that especially for doors or

26:00 ↗ some accent materials or trims people

26:03 ↗ aren't too concerned about allowing some

26:06 ↗ of these brighter and Wilder colors and

26:08 ↗ people thought this might even be fun to

26:11 ↗ let people you know express themselves

26:14 ↗ this way whoops in terms of having these

26:20 ↗ bright colors as the primary color of

26:22 ↗ the house I think this is where we've

26:23 ↗ got a little more of that mixed feedback

26:25 ↗ so again this might be where we want to

26:29 ↗ explore preventing those overly bright

26:32 ↗ or you know the basic hue of a color and

26:34 ↗ you have to have something a little more

26:36 ↗ subdued if you're talking about the

26:38 ↗ primary color and I think people for the

26:42 ↗ most part said that they want to avoid

26:45 ↗ this multicolored kind of you know

26:48 ↗ rainbow treatment of a house while this

26:52 ↗ might be appropriate in some places it

26:54 ↗ might be a departure from from the

26:56 ↗ character that we see in Old Town so

26:59 ↗ this could be a relatively easy thing to

27:01 ↗ regulate by saying you know if you have

27:03 ↗ a face of a building you can't have you

27:06 ↗ know one two three four five six seven

27:09 ↗ seven different colors you might say you

27:11 ↗ can do one you know possibly two for the

27:14 ↗ the overall cladding color in terms of

27:19 ↗ windows what we heard was people don't

27:22 ↗ want to overly regulate size or

27:25 ↗ detailing or style but they do want to

27:28 ↗ require some windows and doors on that

27:32 ↗ street facing front of the building

27:34 ↗ sorry I keep getting a little

27:38 ↗ explanation so we looked at you know we

27:43 ↗ can regulate amount of transparency and

27:46 ↗ people thought that that might be a

27:47 ↗ little too much detail for for Old Town

27:50 ↗ in terms of driveways and garages I

27:53 ↗ think we got pretty clear feedback that

27:56 ↗ if there's an alley access for the lot

28:00 ↗ that people want to see the vehicular

28:02 ↗ access they want to see the driveway and

28:04 ↗ the garage facing the alley

28:06 ↗ so in this little drawing the garage is

28:09 ↗ in pink and there's a driveway going off

28:11 ↗ the alley people want to ensure that

28:14 ↗ this is the character because they want

28:17 ↗ to emphasize the street front and the

28:20 ↗ character of the street and that human

28:22 ↗ oriented design knowing that old town

28:26 ↗ has a lot of variety and and nuance to

28:29 ↗ the black pattern there are some lots

28:32 ↗ that don't have alley access so in those

28:35 ↗ conditions we talked about what is the

28:37 ↗ most appropriate way to have garages and

28:40 ↗ driveways and we heard that these two

28:42 ↗ examples on the left are probably the

28:44 ↗ the most supported examples where the

28:48 ↗ garage is either set back behind the

28:51 ↗ house so as you're standing on the

28:53 ↗ street or the sidewalk it's not you're

28:55 ↗ not perceiving it so much or it could be

28:59 ↗ part of the house but you still have you

29:03 ↗ know a nice porch entry or a you know

29:05 ↗ human oriented design feature that feels

29:07 ↗ more prominent to the house we heard

29:11 ↗ that this example where the garage is

29:13 ↗ the first thing it's in front of the

29:15 ↗ house seemed to be out of character with

29:18 ↗ what people want to see so I think

29:21 ↗ people want to discourage that when when

29:23 ↗ possible

29:25 ↗ we talked about front yards and the size

29:28 ↗ of front yards so I'm sure you guys are

29:31 ↗ familiar with the zoning requires a

29:33 ↗ 10-foot minimum setback from the

29:36 ↗ sidewalk but when we walked around and

29:38 ↗ looked at houses we saw that there were

29:40 ↗ some blocks that have a very wide range

29:42 ↗ of up setback so you can see some that

29:46 ↗ are you know right around that that

29:48 ↗ minimum some that go up to 45 feet and

29:52 ↗ then there are some blocks so for

29:53 ↗ instance this is alder between third and

29:55 ↗ fifth that have a pretty consistent

29:58 ↗ setback so most of the houses on this

30:01 ↗ block are set back about 45 feet from

30:04 ↗ the sidewalk so we talked about whether

30:07 ↗ or not this matters if people want to

30:09 ↗ preserve this character we got some

30:12 ↗ mixed feedback I think some people felt

30:14 ↗ like this was more important than others

30:16 ↗ I think what we did here is if people

30:19 ↗ wanted to preserve this to still allow

30:22 ↗ some sort of flexibility for instance if

30:24 ↗ more than 50% of the houses on the block

30:28 ↗ have a consistent setback maybe your

30:30 ↗ house you know must be set back within 5

30:33 ↗ feet either direction or something like

30:35 ↗ that I think is probably in line with

30:37 ↗ with what we heard in terms of front

30:41 ↗ yards and landscapes people I think this

30:44 ↗ was probably one of the most important

30:46 ↗ things is to ensure that there are clear

30:48 ↗ sidewalks from the sidewalk or clear

30:51 ↗ walkways from the sidewalk to the front

30:53 ↗ door and then front doors facing the

30:55 ↗ streets there are some some groups in

30:58 ↗ our discussions that wanted to require

31:00 ↗ front porches some people wanted to

31:02 ↗ encourage or incentivize it I think

31:05 ↗ requiring it might be a little too far

31:07 ↗ but I think it's noteworthy that some

31:10 ↗ groups thought it's it's that important

31:12 ↗ that that's something to discuss

31:16 ↗ in terms of fencing people didn't want

31:19 ↗ to overly regulate fencing they thought

31:22 ↗ you know whatever you want to build your

31:24 ↗ fence out of is is fine then the main

31:27 ↗ thing we heard was they didn't want to

31:30 ↗ see privacy fences so fences above six

31:32 ↗ feet they didn't want to see those

31:34 ↗ between the sidewalk and the building so

31:37 ↗ with zoning right now as long as it

31:39 ↗ abides by the setbacks you can legally

31:42 ↗ build those so they want to ensure that

31:44 ↗ you see the building not the privacy

31:47 ↗ fence and in terms of natural elements

31:51 ↗ and pervious surfaces so right now

31:54 ↗ zoning allows up to 50% impervious so in

31:58 ↗ theory per zoning you can pave your

32:01 ↗ front yard

32:01 ↗ we heard that people want some sort of

32:04 ↗ natural elements in the front yard they

32:05 ↗ don't want to see a front yard that's

32:07 ↗ completely hardscapes

32:11 ↗ so that's the summary of the single

32:14 ↗ family and kind of what we're thinking

32:16 ↗ about doing with those topics do you

32:18 ↗ guys have any thoughts or comments about

32:19 ↗ that before we move on to these other

32:21 ↗ two topics was there anything that was

32:25 ↗ mentioned that you said there's no way

32:27 ↗ especially you know DC since you've

32:29 ↗ worked with this kind of thing before is

32:31 ↗ is there anything that we talked about

32:33 ↗ that you think there is no way that

32:35 ↗ there that the city could regulate that

32:37 ↗ or enforce those things that we brought

32:39 ↗ up and I just quick note for those who

32:43 ↗ are here that are part of the audience

32:45 ↗ there will be time for audience comments

32:47 ↗ as well after this so you have time to

32:48 ↗ speak as well but is there anything in

32:52 ↗ there that you said this this isn't

32:53 ↗ enforceable or this isn't manageable or

32:56 ↗ why would you do that I mean we want

32:58 ↗ your input too high yeah not so much

33:02 ↗ unenforceable or a great problem but I

33:04 ↗ want to focus on what was said about

33:06 ↗ guidelines versus requirements I think

33:09 ↗ in the existing standards you have

33:11 ↗ something like each section is broken

33:13 ↗ into required and recommended is that

33:16 ↗ right encourage to encourage right so I

33:20 ↗ just wanted to mention that in the

33:21 ↗ central Issaquah guide our parallel for

33:24 ↗ that would have been appropriate and

33:26 ↗ inappropriate and I think in general we

33:28 ↗ found that it was useful to have the

33:30 ↗ inappropriate sections that were more

33:32 ↗ like guidelines really than were like

33:35 ↗ hard requirements if you don't include

33:39 ↗ the guidelines at all I wonder if you

33:41 ↗ may include some of that information up

33:43 ↗ in the intent section because we I think

33:46 ↗ we found that it was helpful to be able

33:47 ↗ to have some guidance there more than

33:52 ↗ simply the prescriptive requirements

33:54 ↗ yeah that's a great comment and exactly

33:58 ↗ what we're doing in terms of guidelines

34:00 ↗ for the existing ones I think we still

34:02 ↗ need to figure out because there are

34:03 ↗ some that have those encouraged

34:06 ↗ statements but once we get into the you

34:09 ↗ know the meat and the specifics we're

34:11 ↗ definitely going to want to make sure

34:12 ↗ that we're calibrated correctly so

34:15 ↗ that's a really great feedback to have

34:21 ↗ alright I'll move on to the other topic

34:23 ↗ I thought I guess on on the building

34:26 ↗ materials it sounded like you said you

34:27 ↗ wanted to leave that open and not

34:29 ↗ regulate those and then and it brought

34:33 ↗ the question okay if somebody came in

34:35 ↗ and said I want to do a you know a

34:36 ↗ plywood faced house or something and is

34:40 ↗ that just fall under eclectic then or or

34:43 ↗ if you're trying to regulate roofs and

34:45 ↗ colors and everything else can you leave

34:48 ↗ that open and have it work yeah we want

34:52 ↗ to make sure that we want to create some

34:54 ↗ you know barriers and I would say that

34:58 ↗ plywood probably isn't that durable of a

35:00 ↗ material so we'll have some language

35:03 ↗ about you know making sure it's can hold

35:07 ↗ up over time in this climate and that

35:09 ↗ kind of thing so I think we'll have

35:11 ↗ enough guide guidance in there to deny a

35:14 ↗ plywood house but I like the way you're

35:17 ↗ thinking you know and I did have some

35:19 ↗ phone calls and there were comments at

35:21 ↗ the at the neighborhood meeting where

35:24 ↗ they were concerns that if we excuse me

35:27 ↗ regulate materials that they don't want

35:29 ↗ them to be expensive totally on board

35:31 ↗ with that but we do want to make sure

35:33 ↗ that we want people to be able to stay

35:35 ↗ in their homes for a long time so the

35:36 ↗ more durable the material the longer

35:38 ↗ that that's gonna last so it's a balance

35:41 ↗ but yeah good point so here's another

35:44 ↗ point to that I grew up on in Lake

35:46 ↗ Marcel Duvall there's quite a few log

35:49 ↗ cabin houses would those be appropriate

35:52 ↗ in Old Town I wouldn't think so and that

35:55 ↗ is durable material yeah that's a good

35:59 ↗ point

36:00 ↗ is log cabin a style

36:03 ↗ or is it a material I mean you probably

36:05 ↗ probably but it's cedar shake it's a

36:10 ↗ further extension of that question of

36:12 ↗ saying even if it fits something that

36:14 ↗ people find pleasing is this what we

36:15 ↗ want to have in the community which is

36:17 ↗ kind of how some of these discussions

36:18 ↗ got started for me you start to say a

36:22 ↗ lot of things about being eclectic a

36:24 ↗ giving room but on that same tone then

36:28 ↗ with setbacks you start saying well

36:31 ↗ we're gonna regulate it by Street I mean

36:33 ↗ I just I think that your some of your

36:35 ↗ decisions have to be a little more broad

36:37 ↗ you can't say on one Street we allow

36:39 ↗ this and then on another we don't and

36:42 ↗ still have that eclectic we want people

36:44 ↗ to feel comfortable in this artist

36:45 ↗ community so I'm seeing some conflicting

36:47 ↗ thoughts right now and I think that goes

36:50 ↗ to that point of materials of saying

36:51 ↗ either there's something that doesn't

36:53 ↗ fit this vibe or we're going to say no

36:56 ↗ we want to see what we get and then see

36:58 ↗ are we getting a lot of issues and then

37:00 ↗ go back to it which kind of then defers

37:02 ↗ back to the whole point of why we

37:03 ↗ started this so I do think there's some

37:05 ↗ cleaning up that needs to happen as far

37:06 ↗ as the do's and do nots right now it's a

37:09 ↗ little bit loose and then you start to

37:10 ↗ say except that if you're on this street

37:12 ↗ and we're gonna have this exact

37:13 ↗ guideline well you know if someone wants

37:16 ↗ to put pavers and it looks very nice and

37:18 ↗ they have a fountain then they decided

37:19 ↗ this is where their kids are gonna ride

37:20 ↗ their bicycles but someone else prefers

37:22 ↗ grass that's their property I mean you

37:24 ↗ need to have very clear lines of saying

37:26 ↗ this is or isn't okay in the sense that

37:30 ↗ it's it is going to breathe and have a

37:33 ↗ life and you have to allow those

37:35 ↗ homeowners to be able to do what they

37:38 ↗ want in a sense so having the do nots is

37:41 ↗ very important because that allows the

37:43 ↗ do I mean you buy by having it vary so

37:47 ↗ much on one hand but then not in another

37:49 ↗ I think it's a little tricky it's a good

37:53 ↗ point

37:53 ↗ so how would you guys respond to the

37:56 ↗ log-cabin do you think that should be

37:58 ↗ allowed or do you think that that is

38:00 ↗ wine I think it shouldn't be myself I

38:03 ↗ think it's out of character for what

38:04 ↗ we've seen yeah but I can also see cedar

38:07 ↗ shake being used as an accent on a wall

38:09 ↗ in a way that looks very nice and

38:11 ↗ thinking of the home that's over at the

38:13 ↗ circle over on the lake that was built

38:15 ↗ in the last couple years

38:16 ↗ that has a very beautiful field that I

38:19 ↗ don't know that we would say this is not

38:21 ↗ allowed and if it isn't then it needs to

38:23 ↗ be very specifically called out just the

38:26 ↗ same way that we did we and our other

38:28 ↗ and our other guidelines but it doesn't

38:30 ↗ sound like we're going that way with it

38:31 ↗ with Old Town so you have to be able to

38:33 ↗ say we are going to be more eclectic

38:35 ↗ with that and this is what will then be

38:36 ↗ okay I guess the point that I'm trying

38:38 ↗ to figure out is we're talking about

38:39 ↗ having a an eclectic part of town that's

38:44 ↗ I guess the word artistry was used yet

38:47 ↗ when I Drive around it seems much more

38:48 ↗ uniform than that so where is like to

38:51 ↗ Joy's point where is that standard you

38:54 ↗ know because again I don't really know

38:56 ↗ when I Drive through it I see much more

38:57 ↗ of a uniform older part of the city but

39:01 ↗ when I hear eclectic and artistry I

39:03 ↗ think of you know Lombardi Street and

39:05 ↗ the streets like that or natural colored

39:08 ↗ or like you know Capitol Hill places

39:12 ↗ that where it is actually prominent much

39:15 ↗ more murals you know a lot of different

39:17 ↗ ways to display that and I think to even

39:20 ↗ in your modern examples harken to older

39:24 ↗ architecture Craftsman style and things

39:26 ↗ like that so it's easy to say that we

39:28 ↗ don't want something that's boxy flat

39:31 ↗ roof that's a good start but your modern

39:34 ↗ examples harken to a vintage vibe which

39:36 ↗ really gets to the heart of what we want

39:38 ↗ to preserve an old town so maybe we need

39:40 ↗ to think about how do we preserve that

39:42 ↗ and that is with those guidelines rather

39:43 ↗ than saying well we hope that you do it

39:46 ↗ this way and I would think color would

39:48 ↗ play a large part of that a big part of

39:50 ↗ that materials

39:53 ↗ so you're thinking having more specifics

39:56 ↗ in terms of allowed or would you want to

39:58 ↗ go down the road of encourage materials

40:00 ↗ or a loud versus prohibited we've I

40:03 ↗ remember from our of multiple meetings

40:05 ↗ on these topics we found that the

40:07 ↗ community really supported limiting and

40:10 ↗ calling out what was and wasn't okay we

40:12 ↗ didn't find that there was a movement

40:14 ↗ from the public saying there's too much

40:17 ↗ were being stifled we found it was the

40:19 ↗ opposite people were not liking the new

40:21 ↗ developments that they were that we were

40:22 ↗ getting so I would lean more towards

40:24 ↗ exploring how do we define rather

40:27 ↗ then again that kind of concept of less

40:30 ↗ guideline and more saying this is what

40:33 ↗ you can't I can't use but that again

40:34 ↗ being said is that it's very important

40:36 ↗ that we keep a character without pricing

40:41 ↗ people out of homes we want to keep old

40:43 ↗ town affordable and we want people to be

40:45 ↗ able to age in place as well

40:47 ↗ so if you need to take out your steps

40:49 ↗ and put in a ramp that should be allowed

40:51 ↗ it shouldn't say well that you know your

40:54 ↗ steps were grandfathered in but now

40:55 ↗ there's a separate code and you can't do

40:56 ↗ this or that we want to make it more

40:58 ↗ affordable for people to age in place

41:00 ↗ and that means having some looser

41:01 ↗ standards with how something is facing

41:04 ↗ the street for instance that's great

41:13 ↗ materials to to Jason's point about the

41:16 ↗ log cabin it would be easier I think for

41:21 ↗ us to tackle the do nots than the do's

41:24 ↗ because we don't know what the future

41:26 ↗ trends may look like because as they are

41:29 ↗ emerging but we do know what we do not

41:32 ↗ want in terms of materials in standards

41:36 ↗ and if someone does approach that

41:38 ↗ boundary to have maybe a review of that

41:43 ↗ because maybe it would be appropriate to

41:45 ↗ have a log cabin style home in Old Town

41:49 ↗ if it's designed in a way that looks

41:53 ↗ very similar and and is eclectic but it

41:58 ↗ matches the neighborhood right so I

41:59 ↗ don't want to necessarily say you can't

42:01 ↗ absolutely have this style but if it

42:04 ↗ approaches that then maybe it going for

42:07 ↗ a review and say ok we can look at that

42:09 ↗ but in terms of building materials I

42:12 ↗ know that there are some building

42:13 ↗ materials used up in the highlands I

42:15 ↗ don't think would be appropriate for Old

42:17 ↗ Town because they just don't hold up and

42:20 ↗ these are developers that have said

42:22 ↗ these materials will hold up no problem

42:24 ↗ and they're they're failing so I think

42:29 ↗ we need to be very careful about

42:31 ↗ articulating what doesn't work for all

42:34 ↗ towns so we don't get this stuff into

42:36 ↗ old town and have a devalue or property

42:39 ↗ yes also in the central Issaquah guide

42:42 ↗ we did break down into appropriate and

42:44 ↗ inappropriate sections for each section

42:47 ↗ that we had and we found I think that it

42:49 ↗ was easier to specify the inappropriate

42:51 ↗ than the appropriate what would you guys

42:54 ↗ classify as inappropriate if you could I

42:59 ↗ don't know if stucco would look good I

43:01 ↗ mean stucco I guess if it's done

43:03 ↗ appropriately both Gables and it could

43:08 ↗ possibly but I would think stucco might

43:10 ↗ be something that would look a little

43:12 ↗ look a little out of uniformity from Old

43:15 ↗ Town like a statement regarding durable

43:18 ↗ materials and natural materials and

43:20 ↗ there's a sustainability plus there in

43:23 ↗ terms of the durability of the materials

43:25 ↗ so that's a good statement I felt a

43:27 ↗ little uncomfortable about the final

43:29 ↗ citing example I saw up there yeah it

43:33 ↗ was a vinyl I think suckle is a great

43:38 ↗ example of a material that may not be as

43:39 ↗ durable because a lot of is dependent on

43:41 ↗ the application process by the

43:43 ↗ contractor so it involves a lot of

43:46 ↗ quality carpet craftsmanship I also want

43:49 ↗ to comment something about mentioned

43:51 ↗ earlier regarding porches I would

43:53 ↗ probably my personal opinion would be

43:56 ↗ the fact that porches would be something

43:57 ↗ that's difficult to regulate and I don't

43:59 ↗ know that that's something worth

44:00 ↗ regulating but because it is an added

44:02 ↗ construction cost you know not everyone

44:06 ↗ may be spending as much time on the

44:07 ↗ porches these days I think you know part

44:09 ↗ of our goal is to try to give community

44:10 ↗ out there involved or I'd encourage

44:11 ↗ involvement participation and events go

44:14 ↗ into the beach and you know now we're

44:18 ↗ we're all short on time right I mean in

44:20 ↗ our busy lives so I think requirement

44:23 ↗ porches would be a would be a very

44:25 ↗ difficult difficult task from my opinion

44:28 ↗ can I I'm gonna go off of that cuz it

44:30 ↗ reminds me of something you said earlier

44:31 ↗ where you said no other single-family

44:33 ↗ homes have been regulated like that in

44:35 ↗ Issaquah but that's not the case because

44:36 ↗ in the highlands they have been so I

44:38 ↗ would recommend reaching out to to see

44:42 ↗ exactly how the Highlands have really

44:44 ↗ developed because they have made a lot

44:46 ↗ of strides for saying we want to have

44:48 ↗ porches it creates a community feel so I

44:50 ↗ would write I would reach out to the

44:52 ↗ to the Association because they've had a

44:54 ↗ lot of really good feedback from

44:56 ↗ developers from all the projects that

44:59 ↗ that they've done of saying how has this

45:01 ↗ how did what we want actually get

45:03 ↗ achieved because there have been pretty

45:05 ↗ strict design guidelines that have been

45:07 ↗ put on some of those buildings for

45:08 ↗ better and for worse that they've

45:10 ↗ experienced and so I think they may have

45:11 ↗ a pretty interesting situation to look

45:14 ↗ at to how we can kind of model that

45:15 ↗ that's a good example I just you know a

45:17 ↗ lot of those that were put in place were

45:18 ↗ put in place before anybody ever moved

45:20 ↗ there so people moved into that area

45:22 ↗ knowing what they were getting into but

45:24 ↗ I think in Old Town at least at my table

45:26 ↗ at the meeting that we had some of the

45:29 ↗ people said we moved here because there

45:30 ↗ is no HOA and we do get to do what we

45:33 ↗ want and then somebody said but it would

45:35 ↗ be great to have a free HOA that we

45:37 ↗ didn't have to pay into something to

45:38 ↗ regulate some of these things so mixed

45:40 ↗ feedback but I do think a lot of people

45:42 ↗ moved in here and definitely I mean good

45:44 ↗ to see how those regulations have worked

45:45 ↗ with people on the single-family homes

45:48 ↗ but I think this is a different

45:50 ↗ situation too but certainly worth

45:51 ↗ comparing the two yeah thank you

46:00 ↗ is that even a factor to consider energy

46:02 ↗ efficiency in the materials that are

46:04 ↗ desirable to use I honestly don't know

46:07 ↗ the answer to that but I know the city

46:08 ↗ is trying to get toward carbon neutral

46:10 ↗ eventually and it you know the next

46:12 ↗ century or whatever it is and I'm not

46:15 ↗ making light of that but I know that is

46:17 ↗ a City objective so I don't know enough

46:22 ↗ about building materials to know if

46:24 ↗ that's something that should be

46:26 ↗ considered in terms of we'd really like

46:29 ↗ to see any new construction whether it's

46:32 ↗ remodeling or or entirely new building

46:35 ↗ from this range of materials and one of

46:38 ↗ the criteria for the selection of these

46:39 ↗ materials is is their energy efficiency

46:41 ↗ you know we've we've talked about that

46:44 ↗ and Keith who's hiding in the back or

46:46 ↗ Trish might be able to answer it better

46:48 ↗ than me I know that there's a

46:49 ↗ sustainability plan that's in place that

46:52 ↗ encourages right now but just not so

46:54 ↗ here he comes but does not require I

46:58 ↗ don't know what the upfront cost costs

47:00 ↗ are for that and you know I think that

47:01 ↗ there are long-term benefits but because

47:03 ↗ the upfront costs

47:04 ↗ I don't know I hear good who else is

47:20 ↗ quite a Randi hi Andy

47:22 ↗ so right now the city is I think you all

47:25 ↗ know were updating Title 18 land use

47:28 ↗ code part of 2020 is also updating the

47:33 ↗ building code so the next round of

47:35 ↗ building code updates needs to be

47:37 ↗ adopted by the city in July so there's a

47:40 ↗ conversation right now through Office of

47:42 ↗ Sustainability they have a consultant

47:44 ↗ named Suzanne and Suzanne is looking

47:48 ↗ through both our land use code and

47:51 ↗ building code for opportunities to

47:53 ↗ increase kind of our sustainable makeup

47:58 ↗ so I don't have an answer for you but I

48:01 ↗ can tell you people are thinking about

48:02 ↗ that and looking at it right now you

48:07 ↗ know when when the Development

48:09 ↗ Commission was working on uh standards

48:10 ↗ and guides that we did one of the one of

48:13 ↗ the things that became very clear was

48:14 ↗ their two philosophies who want us to be

48:16 ↗ very strict and prescriptive and the

48:18 ↗ other is to be not so strict and accept

48:21 ↗ the fact that every once in a while

48:22 ↗ somebody's going to come up with Scouts

48:23 ↗ some kind of notion that you didn't plan

48:25 ↗ for and it's a great opportunity to be

48:28 ↗ able to take a look at your standard and

48:29 ↗ say can we facilitate this or not and so

48:32 ↗ the the specifics are not nearly as

48:35 ↗ important as being able to step back and

48:37 ↗ say what's your overall goal and

48:38 ↗ perspective what are you really trying

48:40 ↗ to accomplish and so if he wanted to do

48:42 ↗ a log cabin for instance in Old Town I

48:46 ↗ think there would be room for that but I

48:49 ↗ would I would really want to take a look

48:51 ↗ at it and see how that fit into the

48:52 ↗ context of where it was being built so

48:54 ↗ that so it's more about a context thing

48:56 ↗ than a than worrying about whether the

48:58 ↗ bricks are 12 inches or the logs are 5

49:01 ↗ you know I think that gets really nutso

49:03 ↗ and so just acknowledge the fact that

49:05 ↗ you're you're not going to cover every

49:07 ↗ every facet and it's more important to

49:10 ↗ be able to have enough flexibility so

49:12 ↗ that you can create that environment

49:13 ↗ where people can feel

49:16 ↗ creative at the same time not be so

49:19 ↗ whacked out that they do something

49:20 ↗ really weird and and that's that's

49:22 ↗ really subjective that really weird is

49:24 ↗ subjective that's a good point Richard I

49:27 ↗ you know we like to refer that in our

49:29 ↗ industry as prescriptive versus

49:30 ↗ performance so you know looking at the

49:32 ↗ overall performance of a building or a

49:34 ↗ structure versus the individual elements

49:36 ↗ you know how does it perform as an

49:38 ↗ overall so I think there's definitely

49:39 ↗ opportunities to you know if one area is

49:42 ↗ lacking to compensate for other parts

49:45 ↗ within the structure so so yet you said

49:53 ↗ at the beginning that this is the only

49:55 ↗ area in the city residential

49:57 ↗ single-family residential neighborhoods

49:58 ↗ that would have regulations and that's

50:00 ↗ when it's being contemplated and so when

50:03 ↗ I was thinking about this it's really

50:04 ↗ thinking about old town and what do you

50:08 ↗ want to preserve what is the character

50:10 ↗ what are the elements of old town that

50:11 ↗ you want to preserve as you look at it

50:12 ↗ now what are those things that you want

50:14 ↗ to prevent there are some things that

50:16 ↗ have happened in the redevelopment

50:17 ↗ that's like well that's not really what

50:19 ↗ we want to see continue and then it's

50:21 ↗ what do you want to encourage in the

50:22 ↗ redevelopment because it's all

50:24 ↗ redevelopment now I mean it's it's been

50:26 ↗ built out for a long time and so I think

50:28 ↗ similar to the previous comments it's

50:31 ↗ you know it will be prescriptive in a

50:34 ↗ lot of ways I think you need to be

50:36 ↗ pretty selective at what you start with

50:38 ↗ it's you can't go in and regulate every

50:42 ↗ element of a building but you can talk

50:44 ↗ about the scale the massing of buildings

50:46 ↗ and setbacks and things that are

50:48 ↗ important articulation in certain cases

50:50 ↗ garage locations I think those are all

50:52 ↗ really good and you could start with

50:54 ↗ more prescriptive approaches there but

50:56 ↗ you really do need to have general you

50:59 ↗ know Connie this is the character in the

51:01 ↗ intent and the purpose and intent

51:03 ↗ elements of the code that give more

51:05 ↗ broad discretion I think on some of the

51:08 ↗ other pieces to allow that kind of

51:10 ↗ creativity to happen but still give

51:12 ↗ tools if things really kind of get off

51:15 ↗ track for what you want to see we're

51:18 ↗ staff or whoever the decision-making

51:20 ↗ authority will be on the design has the

51:23 ↗ ability to push back a little bit and

51:25 ↗ then if you're still getting things that

51:27 ↗ aren't what

51:28 ↗ we want to see happen as redevelopment

51:30 ↗ occur you can tighten the regulations

51:32 ↗ down a little bit but I really would be

51:34 ↗ careful about trying to get too detailed

51:37 ↗ at the beginning of this process because

51:41 ↗ I think that could paint painted into a

51:43 ↗ corner and you may get a lot of things

51:45 ↗ that are not what we would like to see

51:48 ↗ happen or you could really throttle back

51:50 ↗ reinvestment in that part of the city

51:51 ↗ and you don't want that to happen either

51:52 ↗ you want people to continue to invest in

51:54 ↗ that property I like to also bring up an

51:59 ↗ interesting point I've heard many people

52:01 ↗ talking about

52:02 ↗ performance building performance

52:04 ↗ sustainability and character and the

52:09 ↗ eclectic Ness of the neighborhood as we

52:12 ↗ as emerging technology moves forward

52:16 ↗ with renewable energies we may be seeing

52:20 ↗ things like solar panels on roofs and I

52:23 ↗ believe that's actually being deployed

52:25 ↗ now in parts of Bellevue what do we

52:28 ↗ think about having solar panels on roofs

52:31 ↗ in Old Town today and then - what if

52:35 ↗ there was another option where if

52:37 ↗ instead of having solar panels on roofs

52:40 ↗ where they could purchase higher credits

52:44 ↗ with PSC and actually get the renewable

52:47 ↗ energies from PSC as opposed to putting

52:50 ↗ on these additional utility structures

52:52 ↗ on their house

52:56 ↗ yeah that that may fall into the

52:59 ↗ citywide sustainability unless you're

53:03 ↗ saying that you don't think we want to

53:05 ↗ allow solar but I didn't hear that in

53:07 ↗ the community I heard that they want to

53:11 ↗ allow and even encourage some of those

53:14 ↗ more sustainability metrics right but

53:16 ↗ does the community know what that looks

53:18 ↗ like because it is a merging tech and

53:21 ↗ then people there isn't anybody in Old

53:23 ↗ Town that I'm aware of that has solar on

53:26 ↗ the roof and but do we want houses with

53:28 ↗ all these solar panels on the roof

53:30 ↗ what's the feel from that I think we

53:34 ↗ need to find out you know I think

53:38 ↗ there's an aesthetic piece of that but

53:40 ↗ there's also a financial piece to that

53:42 ↗ and what's is it more important that

53:45 ↗ people can you know have the can pay for

53:49 ↗ their inert Beach energy bills every

53:51 ↗ month because they've gone down because

53:52 ↗ they're using solar panels or is it more

53:54 ↗ important that you don't have solar

53:55 ↗ panels on the roof but I think that's it

53:56 ↗ question and something that needs to be

53:58 ↗ brought up this is our first public

54:00 ↗ meeting as far as you guys go so we've

54:02 ↗ got lots of time and certainly could

54:04 ↗ bring that up again

54:05 ↗ I wonder if you might consider a

54:07 ↗ sustainability section for your manual

54:10 ↗ somewhere and just to get the

54:12 ↗ conversation going and maybe it refers

54:14 ↗ to the Dakotas it's updated or the

54:18 ↗ city's sustainability initiative so

54:20 ↗ people would have a target to go to find

54:22 ↗ the latest and greatest on that I just

54:26 ↗ like to suggest something I acute the

54:28 ↗ word encouraged a lot and from my

54:32 ↗ perspective anyway unless I understand

54:34 ↗ where the word is it not unless I

54:36 ↗ understand what the word means if I'm

54:37 ↗ coming in with an application to build

54:39 ↗ something I don't understand what the

54:41 ↗ word means then that causes me confusion

54:43 ↗ so I think with all the comments here

54:46 ↗ you can see the complexity of what we're

54:49 ↗ trying to do here and I'm still not sure

54:50 ↗ I understand exactly what we're trying

54:53 ↗ to do here so so if we start using

54:55 ↗ throwing in layers like using the word

54:58 ↗ encourage as opposed to incentivize with

55:01 ↗ a dollar limits attached for example and

55:04 ↗ I think

55:04 ↗ because confusion so I think that is

55:07 ↗ something we want to stay away from

55:08 ↗ whatever we do here whatever is done I

55:12 ↗ think wants to be and we started out

55:13 ↗ with this comment actually clear and

55:15 ↗ this best we can

55:17 ↗ unambiguous to those who want to live

55:20 ↗ here who want to build here and I make

55:23 ↗ you Sukhois home in one way or another

55:25 ↗ so encourage and words like that fine

55:31 ↗ let's just suggest you know I totally

55:34 ↗ agree and that's why we're thinking

55:35 ↗ especially for the single family to

55:38 ↗ start with what do we want to require or

55:41 ↗ prohibit and then we still have this

55:44 ↗ long list of things that we heard want

55:46 ↗ to encourage so maybe in a year we'll

55:49 ↗ revisit that list to see you know are we

55:51 ↗ missing anything do we want to add

55:53 ↗ something because and in in the outline

55:56 ↗ we talked about you know the difference

55:58 ↗ between intense standards and guidelines

55:59 ↗ and guidelines there really aren't any

56:02 ↗ teeth but that's typically where you

56:03 ↗ find that encouraged so it does add a

56:06 ↗ lot of confusion to people what they're

56:09 ↗ required to do and what they're not

56:10 ↗ required to do so we can use and I think

56:13 ↗ we've been talking about that we can use

56:14 ↗ the intent statements to get at that and

56:17 ↗ just not be overly prescriptive in terms

56:20 ↗ of how people do it

56:22 ↗ so I write small taken

56:30 ↗ any other topics mm move on so I could

56:33 ↗ talk about some other other issues you

56:37 ↗ want to start with the game

56:49 ↗ I don't know how far we'll make it with

56:51 ↗ this topic but you'll see we started it

56:55 ↗ internally just staff and it just kept

56:59 ↗ going and we said let's let's see what

57:01 ↗ the Commission's think so

57:03 ↗ placemaking in our existing standards we

57:06 ↗ talked about we actually have identified

57:08 ↗ gateways into old town and when we were

57:12 ↗ doing our sub area plan updates we tried

57:16 ↗ to identify locations but it never

57:18 ↗ happened because we particularly with

57:21 ↗ the north and south nobody could agree

57:22 ↗ on where the north and south gateways

57:24 ↗ for Old Town should be so we're gonna

57:26 ↗ get your feel on it tonight because it

57:28 ↗ says here one of our policies design

57:31 ↗ gateway features to mark north south

57:33 ↗ east and in West entrances to Old Town

57:36 ↗ when public and private redevelopment

57:39 ↗ opportunities occur so the public and

57:41 ↗ private is part of a discussion as well

57:44 ↗ so I'm gonna skip that one where should

57:49 ↗ they be located we want to run some

57:51 ↗ feedback on this so right now our North

57:54 ↗ Gate North gateway is actually it's yeah

57:59 ↗ it is is considered to be at Gilman and

58:02 ↗ Front Street and right just about where

58:05 ↗ Rainier crosses up there there's

58:08 ↗ actually a sign however that says

58:10 ↗ welcome to Issaquah as you get further

58:13 ↗ down towards dogwood i believe it is in

58:16 ↗ the in the rainier Front Street

58:18 ↗ intersection right in there

58:20 ↗ you've got dairy gold which is a big

58:24 ↗ landmark out there you have the March

58:28 ↗ mercantile building I oh yeah what is

58:33 ↗ now what does that called army

58:39 ↗ lazy boy yeah lazy boy out there and

58:43 ↗ then you have smaller you know things

58:45 ↗ you know like this is this is a house in

58:47 ↗ here that it is a commercial building as

58:50 ↗ well I think it's a non-profit right

58:51 ↗ there so first of all thoughts on where

58:55 ↗ you think North Old Town begins

58:58 ↗ yes where the north part of Old Town

59:02 ↗ begins its thank you again I think the

59:13 ↗ operative word here is old and we're

59:16 ↗ gonna forget the fact that I've got a

59:18 ↗ problem with the e but so those

59:23 ↗ buildings there with the exception of

59:26 ↗ the lazy boy but certainly the dairy

59:30 ↗ goal certainly the mercantile building

59:32 ↗ are some of the oldest buildings

59:34 ↗ municipal so that seems to be kind of a

59:38 ↗ starting point for me that you know

59:43 ↗ that's the place where you start getting

59:45 ↗ into old architecture and the creeks

59:47 ↗ also goes right right under right under

59:50 ↗ Front Street

59:51 ↗ I mean Gillman no front there so that's

59:55 ↗ an that's kind of a natural actually for

59:59 ↗ me the creek is almost a defining factor

1:00:02 ↗ all the way around there especially on

1:00:04 ↗ the on the west so that's my two cents

1:00:08 ↗ worth that it seems to me to be the

1:00:10 ↗ beginning of Old Town is where the old

1:00:11 ↗ building start sidebar one of the

1:00:16 ↗ taskforce recommendations was to remove

1:00:18 ↗ the e from Old Town and we brought it up

1:00:22 ↗ during the plan update and there was an

1:00:24 ↗ uproar because old means old and old e

1:00:27 ↗ means character is that that was the

1:00:31 ↗ worst thing only thing worse than that

1:00:33 ↗ to me would be to have a science a hip

1:00:35 ↗ because you got to tell people your hip

1:00:38 ↗ thank you any other thoughts so if we

1:00:42 ↗ were to put Old Town at the start of the

1:00:44 ↗ creek and a developer came in where

1:00:46 ↗ there used to be a Shell gas station

1:00:48 ↗ where the oil changing places

1:00:52 ↗ and someone put it in a modern high-rise

1:00:54 ↗ would that character be a would it make

1:01:01 ↗ old town look like it's out of place

1:01:02 ↗ because when you're coming into how I

1:01:07 ↗ said would it be out of character as a

1:01:10 ↗ question so that's still in the cultural

1:01:14 ↗ and business district and if the new

1:01:17 ↗ land use code regulations get passed it

1:01:20 ↗ won't be able to go above 40 feet or

1:01:22 ↗ three storeys whichever is lower okay

1:01:25 ↗ whatever it goes up there but the

1:01:26 ↗ building character could be very

1:01:28 ↗ different from that of Old Town and they

1:01:32 ↗ will still fall under the Old Town

1:01:33 ↗ design standards because it's in the CBD

1:01:36 ↗ okay so what we're defining here is and

1:01:40 ↗ maybe I'm confused what we're defining

1:01:42 ↗ as the start of Old Town but not the Old

1:01:44 ↗ Town design Stanners Old Town it's a

1:01:48 ↗ gateway sort of announcing here here we

1:01:50 ↗ are a back two slides you gonna make me

1:01:54 ↗ figure out which way is back it's a

1:01:56 ↗ symbolic hint to people who are driving

1:01:59 ↗ into the area you're transitioning into

1:02:01 ↗ a distinctive area so the current

1:02:05 ↗ standards these are some pages that deal

1:02:08 ↗ with gateways so it talks about it in

1:02:10 ↗ two ways and one is this public

1:02:12 ↗ investment so the arch or some you know

1:02:15 ↗ an art feature or something like that

1:02:17 ↗ and then one is in terms of the private

1:02:19 ↗ development so with the plan guidance it

1:02:23 ↗ was a little unclear how we wanted to

1:02:26 ↗ interpret that into the standards

1:02:28 ↗ whether or not we want to keep this or

1:02:29 ↗ if we want to focus it just on the

1:02:32 ↗ public investment or the private and I

1:02:34 ↗ think what you were getting at is does

1:02:37 ↗ the architecture need to respond in a

1:02:39 ↗ way can it or should it not when it's in

1:02:42 ↗ this area is that what you're getting at

1:02:43 ↗ in terms of yeah that's that's pretty

1:02:46 ↗ much a so if we say Old Town starts at

1:02:49 ↗ to Randy's point the creek then does

1:02:53 ↗ that mean what's in front between the

1:02:55 ↗ creek and Gillman could that be out of

1:02:58 ↗ character with Old Town and create

1:03:03 ↗ visual visual defects yeah sorts right

1:03:07 ↗ yeah and I think that's precisely what

1:03:09 ↗ we're asking you you know are the a are

1:03:13 ↗ these the right locations if it is then

1:03:17 ↗ how do we want to market do we want to

1:03:19 ↗ have a departure like that or do we want

1:03:22 ↗ to steer away from the private side so

1:03:25 ↗ we've had a lot of discussion about it

1:03:27 ↗ and so that's why we're curious what you

1:03:29 ↗ guys thought about what these gateways

1:03:31 ↗ are and how we want to interpret them in

1:03:34 ↗ the standards I'm a proponent of having

1:03:37 ↗ that Front Street and Gillman being the

1:03:40 ↗ beginning for the north entrance into

1:03:42 ↗ Old Town this is more from discussions

1:03:44 ↗ that we've had on our Commission over

1:03:46 ↗ time that we've come to kind of saying

1:03:48 ↗ how do we want to introduce people into

1:03:50 ↗ Old Town and we think about the

1:03:51 ↗ neighbors that are around it we think

1:03:53 ↗ about the xxx The Grange is down the

1:03:55 ↗ street we see a distinct character

1:03:56 ↗ difference when you turn that corner and

1:03:59 ↗ I'm thinking right now that there's

1:04:01 ↗ regularly a giant banner right there

1:04:03 ↗ that's announcing what our next festival

1:04:05 ↗ is what are we doing trying to encourage

1:04:07 ↗ people to say hey what's going on really

1:04:09 ↗ in the heart of Old Town and that starts

1:04:11 ↗ right there so I would encourage that

1:04:13 ↗ before the creek that even before you

1:04:15 ↗ get there because once you hit the

1:04:16 ↗ creaking you hit the dairy gold with the

1:04:18 ↗ exception of the lazy boy you are full

1:04:20 ↗ into old town in my opinion so having

1:04:22 ↗ that intersection to me is where it

1:04:23 ↗ begins and I think doing something that

1:04:27 ↗ is large and visual as we often have a

1:04:29 ↗ banner wouldn't be uncharacteristic as

1:04:31 ↗ long as again it fit within a design

1:04:33 ↗ standard if you're looking to announce

1:04:36 ↗ something and we want to say this is Old

1:04:38 ↗ Town welcome because again you've

1:04:40 ↗ already been in Issaquah most likely I

1:04:42 ↗ just want to be clear I don't i wasn't

1:04:45 ↗ saying the creek should be the boundary

1:04:48 ↗ I actually agree with joy it's a good

1:04:49 ↗ question to say where should that be and

1:04:51 ↗ I think the creek is a natural one so I

1:04:53 ↗ like that as a discussion saying I agree

1:04:56 ↗ with you yeah I think to me the front

1:04:58 ↗ Gilman is actually where were you know

1:05:02 ↗ it's the obvious entrance to old town so

1:05:04 ↗ I just mentioned the creek because

1:05:06 ↗ that's kind of one of the defining

1:05:09 ↗ characteristics I was thinking actually

1:05:11 ↗ a very golden tell the joy just

1:05:13 ↗ completely sold me on front so I'm

1:05:16 ↗ actually now also for Front Street and

1:05:18 ↗ Hillman that seems like a good

1:05:20 ↗ demarcation line but if we were to have

1:05:22 ↗ a arch this says welcome to Old Town

1:05:25 ↗ right as right at the point on Gilman

1:05:28 ↗ don't you think that would be too soon I

1:05:33 ↗ know it's semantics but it's kind of

1:05:36 ↗ like but the Grange and the xxx and I

1:05:39 ↗ mean even though it's I don't think it's

1:05:41 ↗ technically part it's still that's

1:05:44 ↗ that's when you start getting the feel

1:05:46 ↗ of it classic question why is it

1:05:48 ↗ important to have these a designation a

1:05:52 ↗ clear delineation of something that's

1:05:54 ↗ essentially amorphous and going to

1:05:56 ↗ change over time what's the point I mean

1:05:59 ↗ it seems to me that one enters that goes

1:06:01 ↗ up leaves Gilman and goes out front you

1:06:03 ↗ already know you don't have to be told

1:06:05 ↗ something's different unless you're

1:06:07 ↗ blind and stupid and that may be the

1:06:09 ↗ case for a lot of people nonetheless so

1:06:11 ↗ I'm not sure how many angels can you fit

1:06:14 ↗ in the head of a pin I mean you have

1:06:17 ↗ this discussion endlessly and that's

1:06:19 ↗ year it might be something different

1:06:20 ↗ because the milk whatever they're called

1:06:23 ↗ has decided to move or what you know and

1:06:25 ↗ that's possibility by the way way the

1:06:28 ↗ world's going so so I'm just wondering

1:06:30 ↗ if it really is a worthwhile discussion

1:06:32 ↗ to have it's an important one I guess

1:06:34 ↗ they're everything feels it is it is

1:06:35 ↗ then fine I'm just raising the question

1:06:37 ↗ it wouldn't be important to me to be

1:06:39 ↗ told when old time begins I can figure

1:06:42 ↗ it out right I think I I think it's an

1:06:45 ↗ identifier if you're new to town I think

1:06:47 ↗ you know wayfinding has been a big topic

1:06:49 ↗ in the city for a long time and that's

1:06:51 ↗ kind of a way of doing some wayfinding

1:06:53 ↗ and it just seems to be since day one

1:06:56 ↗ things that people have wanted we want

1:06:58 ↗ to be identified

1:06:59 ↗ I see part of it as a protection as well

1:07:02 ↗ we've had a lot of discussions about

1:07:04 ↗ protecting Old Town and keeping it as a

1:07:06 ↗ distinct place separate as we see

1:07:09 ↗ development happening in Issaquah and to

1:07:11 ↗ us in previous discussions we've seen it

1:07:13 ↗ as kind of creating a little bit of a

1:07:16 ↗ bubble so that when you come into Old

1:07:17 ↗ Town you unmistakeably know that it's

1:07:20 ↗ different it's not the same as other

1:07:22 ↗ places in the city we like that and we

1:07:24 ↗ want

1:07:24 ↗ encourage it and that kind of helps with

1:07:26 ↗ that I think from a development

1:07:28 ↗ standpoint it's it's an iconic feature

1:07:30 ↗ that introduces Issaquah as a old town

1:07:33 ↗ and it's like judging a book by it's

1:07:36 ↗ cover if it's got a really nice entrance

1:07:37 ↗ people may be more likely to come in and

1:07:39 ↗ and have a better more enjoyable time

1:07:42 ↗ it's about customer experience more than

1:07:45 ↗ function I'll have been a utility aspect

1:07:47 ↗ because there's no utility 'no Stu it

1:07:49 ↗ it's just it's marketing I like to put a

1:07:53 ↗ word in for the bridge as being the

1:07:56 ↗ location for it because I think there

1:07:57 ↗ are some very interesting great

1:07:59 ↗ historical aspects north like the xxx

1:08:02 ↗ and Derry gold and so forth but I don't

1:08:05 ↗ know that those necessarily fit in what

1:08:07 ↗ I would think of the character of Old

1:08:09 ↗ Town to me is the more walkable Main

1:08:13 ↗ Street type of Old Town which i think is

1:08:15 ↗ to me starts at the bridge and goes

1:08:17 ↗ south and I feel that's the walkable

1:08:19 ↗ type of Main Street whereas the Derry

1:08:22 ↗ Gold is sort of industrial the lazy boys

1:08:25 ↗ now mid-century type of stuff we've got

1:08:28 ↗ Bank branches and things like that

1:08:29 ↗ I like the historical buildings north of

1:08:32 ↗ the bridge but I feel to me the

1:08:34 ↗ character of Old Town starts at the

1:08:36 ↗ bridge and goes south I wanted to add

1:08:40 ↗ some extra flavors into the conversation

1:08:42 ↗ just as you're talking about where I

1:08:44 ↗ think it's helpful to talk about what as

1:08:47 ↗ well so we've collected some pictures

1:08:50 ↗ just of different types of gateways and

1:08:53 ↗ we're not saying these are all

1:08:55 ↗ appropriate or not appropriate for Old

1:08:57 ↗ Town but it's just categorizing

1:08:59 ↗ different styles so you know something

1:09:02 ↗ can be you know what we've been talking

1:09:03 ↗ about these archways or the banners can

1:09:05 ↗ be more this public investment it is a

1:09:09 ↗ type of gateway that can be over a

1:09:11 ↗ street or a sidewalk there can be

1:09:14 ↗ prominent you know ground sign that can

1:09:16 ↗ announce to be to be another gateway you

1:09:19 ↗ know these are kind of literal gateways

1:09:22 ↗ you know even there could be an art

1:09:25 ↗ installation again the can can be

1:09:27 ↗ another type of gateway or you can start

1:09:31 ↗ talking and we were starting to get this

1:09:33 ↗ you know you can just use prom

1:09:36 ↗ architectural features can be a gateway

1:09:38 ↗ as well whether it's you know massing

1:09:41 ↗ that has a different shape you know like

1:09:43 ↗ this hexagon or however many sides that

1:09:46 ↗ is or something that's a departure from

1:09:49 ↗ style you know you have this glass shape

1:09:52 ↗ right here that that seems to be a

1:09:55 ↗ departure that that marks you know a

1:09:57 ↗ transition or you can have some sort of

1:10:00 ↗ prominent blade sign you know could

1:10:02 ↗ arguably even be a gateway and then the

1:10:07 ↗ the last type and just in terms of what

1:10:09 ↗ we're thinking is even public spaces

1:10:11 ↗ you know the absence of a building or

1:10:13 ↗ the absence of something could be

1:10:15 ↗ another threshold or another transition

1:10:18 ↗ so I just wanted to run through those as

1:10:20 ↗ we talk about locations just because

1:10:23 ↗ we're talking about what we want to

1:10:25 ↗ write into the standards which typically

1:10:27 ↗ deal with the private property so the

1:10:30 ↗ question is what are we going to require

1:10:32 ↗ private developments to do if they're

1:10:35 ↗ located in these Gateway areas so that's

1:10:37 ↗ kind of the framing question to have

1:10:42 ↗ something so with that I'll go back to

1:10:48 ↗ the north or you guys still want to talk

1:10:50 ↗ about the specific north example where

1:10:54 ↗ we were

1:10:56 ↗ and I think to ask it another way we've

1:11:00 ↗ talked about the banner we've talked it

1:11:02 ↗ seems like more of this discussion has

1:11:05 ↗ been in this private realm I mean the

1:11:09 ↗ public realm in terms of public

1:11:10 ↗ investment to mark the gateway but then

1:11:14 ↗ we've also talked about these these

1:11:15 ↗ buildings contribute to the sense of a

1:11:21 ↗ threshold so if a property was to

1:11:25 ↗ redevelop in this area do we want to

1:11:28 ↗ have specific standards for that

1:11:30 ↗ property or do we need to expand it or

1:11:35 ↗ move that area that's kind of the very

1:11:37 ↗ specific question that we're looking for

1:11:40 ↗ feedback on tonight

1:11:42 ↗ I know I know I think I think we're

1:11:51 ↗ gonna regulate regulate to a fairly

1:11:53 ↗ large extent the development that the

1:11:56 ↗ private people can make and it would

1:11:59 ↗ seem seem more appropriate in my mind to

1:12:01 ↗ have it be a municipal reliability or

1:12:04 ↗ responsibility to be able to create that

1:12:06 ↗ gateway sense whether it's a banner

1:12:07 ↗ statue or a water fountain or whatever

1:12:11 ↗ it is I it just seems like the the

1:12:16 ↗ standards are going to dictate what the

1:12:18 ↗ house is I mean that and it would seem

1:12:21 ↗ pretty inappropriate to have them say

1:12:22 ↗ okay now you have to put up a fountain

1:12:32 ↗ you know I think regulating the

1:12:35 ↗ architecture at the gateways is

1:12:36 ↗ important whether it's at the north east

1:12:37 ↗ south west I also have this kind of

1:12:40 ↗ thought floating around if something

1:12:42 ↗ that can be changed throughout the year

1:12:45 ↗ right you know and we look at what we do

1:12:49 ↗ at the you know during Halloween for

1:12:51 ↗ example order and you know salmon days

1:12:54 ↗ something that can be transformed and

1:12:56 ↗ evolved for something just static

1:12:58 ↗ sitting there getting dirty you know and

1:13:02 ↗ those are just kind of my thoughts on

1:13:04 ↗ Gately

1:13:05 ↗ in general or types of gateways yeah

1:13:09 ↗ well he just mentioned the magic word as

1:13:12 ↗ far as I'm concerned that salmon because

1:13:17 ↗ we are you know there are a lot of

1:13:19 ↗ people in this town that are spending a

1:13:21 ↗ lot of time and effort from the state

1:13:23 ↗ level down to the county level to the

1:13:24 ↗ municipal level the private sector to

1:13:27 ↗ get greater understanding of the fact

1:13:30 ↗ that there is a miracle that takes place

1:13:32 ↗ in a city every year and it's unique in

1:13:36 ↗ the world it's a mass migration that

1:13:38 ↗ goes through the middle of a massive

1:13:41 ↗ modern city and there's no place else in

1:13:43 ↗ the world let it happens and it begins

1:13:45 ↗ and ends right here so if we're gonna

1:13:48 ↗ have something that announces your

1:13:53 ↗ arrival into this place I

1:13:55 ↗ suggested it be something that is

1:13:58 ↗ dedicated to the unique aspect of this

1:14:02 ↗ place and it happens to be in old town

1:14:04 ↗ and that's the hatchery but the symbol

1:14:06 ↗ is salmon and the more I think the more

1:14:09 ↗ that we can do in Issaquah to address

1:14:14 ↗ the long-term viability of this

1:14:18 ↗ endangered species the better

1:14:26 ↗ I completely agree that it's a municipal

1:14:27 ↗ responsibility and especially when we go

1:14:30 ↗ back to things like signage that it's

1:14:33 ↗ something that is something that I think

1:14:36 ↗ we should involve the Arts Commission on

1:14:37 ↗ as well I think that doing something

1:14:39 ↗ like some pictures you had on scale that

1:14:43 ↗ it's a combination of arch and art is

1:14:45 ↗ something that represents Old Town and

1:14:48 ↗ then also as quaza City and we really

1:14:51 ↗ are proud of our salmon runs and I think

1:14:55 ↗ that it's something that it's a very

1:14:56 ↗ nice way to integrate also the green

1:15:00 ↗ space aspect of our character as well

1:15:01 ↗ and so I think there's a lot of play

1:15:03 ↗ there to be done in an artistic way on a

1:15:08 ↗ larger scale there on that northern side

1:15:12 ↗ so just looking at the other locations

1:15:15 ↗ so this you could see that there's a

1:15:17 ↗ hatch which shows where the gateways are

1:15:21 ↗ so this is the the West gateway which

1:15:24 ↗ might be a little ton more challenging

1:15:28 ↗ just in terms of what's there so that's

1:15:32 ↗ the framing question is do we want to

1:15:35 ↗ treat this differently than the north

1:15:38 ↗ you think there should be some municipal

1:15:41 ↗ lead gateway here or some additional

1:15:44 ↗ standards for private redevelopment that

1:15:47 ↗ happens at this intersection it seems

1:15:50 ↗ like that one could be more like there's

1:15:58 ↗ not enough traffic there there's really

1:16:00 ↗ no place to put anything I see something

1:16:02 ↗ that's less and scale but we have the

1:16:04 ↗ creek there right there so it really is

1:16:05 ↗ to me a very symbolic place you're about

1:16:08 ↗ to hit the hatchery you know so to me I

1:16:11 ↗ would I would I would call it more of a

1:16:13 ↗ piece of art rather than arch I think to

1:16:15 ↗ me the scale is a difference here but I

1:16:18 ↗ wouldn't negate it you know coming off

1:16:20 ↗ of Newport there you you do kind of you

1:16:23 ↗ have a big shift to which you're coming

1:16:25 ↗ in you have the the low-rise apartments

1:16:28 ↗ and to the library I mean it's a very

1:16:29 ↗ different feel than Newport and so I

1:16:31 ↗ think calling it out is completely

1:16:33 ↗ appropriate but rather than maybe

1:16:35 ↗ calling out a specific gateway to that

1:16:38 ↗ area the fish hatchery is there and

1:16:41 ↗ maybe using the fish hatchery itself

1:16:43 ↗ with either statue or something like

1:16:45 ↗ that because you had a couple pictures

1:16:47 ↗ that might be good examples use

1:16:49 ↗ something at the fish hatchery to

1:16:51 ↗ announce that you are coming into the

1:16:53 ↗ fish hatchery and that would be the

1:16:55 ↗ gateway to west side of Issaquah and it

1:16:59 ↗ would be a marker to let people know if

1:17:00 ↗ there's something special there and I

1:17:04 ↗ would

1:17:04 ↗ for me I would I would have the city put

1:17:06 ↗ an arch over the bridge here and over

1:17:10 ↗ the bridge at the north end of town and

1:17:12 ↗ both those arches have artistic salmon

1:17:15 ↗ going because that's what's happening

1:17:16 ↗ underneath used to go through there is a

1:17:18 ↗ salmon flowing through have an arch

1:17:20 ↗ there welcome to Old Town it's got the

1:17:23 ↗ salmon they're both the same location

1:17:26 ↗ essentially were salmon days booths and

1:17:29 ↗ so forth in at those bridges you don't

1:17:34 ↗ really have boosts all the way up to the

1:17:35 ↗ north but to me that would be the at

1:17:37 ↗ those two entrances you could have city

1:17:39 ↗ artwork celebrating the salmon reminding

1:17:42 ↗ people you're going over a bridge that

1:17:44 ↗ has salmon underneath it so I I think

1:17:53 ↗ it's a combination I think it is an arch

1:17:57 ↗ or some major feature but there it also

1:17:59 ↗ is a combination of what is the design

1:18:02 ↗ standard for the buildings that will be

1:18:04 ↗ constructed there because if you think

1:18:06 ↗ about when you're entering that you're

1:18:08 ↗ transitioning to a different place the

1:18:10 ↗ look and feel is different it's not just

1:18:12 ↗ a sign that doesn't make the experience

1:18:14 ↗ different it's about what's happening

1:18:16 ↗ around you that makes the experience

1:18:17 ↗ different so you didn't you have

1:18:19 ↗ something that it's kind of a marker it

1:18:20 ↗ could be an arch or a piece of art or

1:18:23 ↗ something that's reflective of the

1:18:25 ↗ community's values and interests but

1:18:27 ↗ it's also thinking about what's

1:18:29 ↗ happening with architecture and

1:18:31 ↗ redevelopment that will happen over time

1:18:32 ↗ so you could require open space or a

1:18:35 ↗ small plaza that has something that is a

1:18:38 ↗ place where people could gather or

1:18:40 ↗ you're integrating art into it or a

1:18:44 ↗ specific feature of the building that is

1:18:46 ↗ a gateway in nature you're not to be

1:18:48 ↗ real specific there but saying it needs

1:18:50 ↗ to be something that is you know a new

1:18:53 ↗ marker from transitioning from one part

1:18:55 ↗ of the city into another so I think it's

1:18:57 ↗ more than just posting a sign or you

1:19:02 ↗ know a piece of art it's a combination

1:19:04 ↗ of things that actually makes a gateway

1:19:06 ↗ really a gateway a transition to a new

1:19:09 ↗ place

1:19:13 ↗ Oh on the the east side right now in the

1:19:20 ↗ standards it's just this little one

1:19:22 ↗ property right there that's designated

1:19:24 ↗ the Gateway and right now it's this a

1:19:29 ↗ vacant looking parcel no I was just

1:19:38 ↗ saying I think it's a kind of used as a

1:19:40 ↗ parking lot for the trailhead right now

1:19:42 ↗ so is the thinking that there's these

1:19:46 ↗ gateways should be different each one

1:19:49 ↗ should be different or should there be a

1:19:52 ↗ common design theme is there one message

1:19:54 ↗ that we're trying to convey to everybody

1:19:58 ↗ that comes in to Old Town through these

1:20:00 ↗ various gateways and I happen to think

1:20:01 ↗ that that it there ought to be a theme

1:20:04 ↗ for all of them

1:20:06 ↗ whatever that is obviously I think

1:20:09 ↗ salmon but I'd be a little bit I don't

1:20:14 ↗ know yes I'm not comfortable with

1:20:15 ↗ different they can be different medium

1:20:19 ↗ maybe a standard in one place or an

1:20:22 ↗ origin and another but but I think the

1:20:24 ↗ message has to be the same so I'm sorry

1:20:29 ↗ I don't know if you're familiar with

1:20:31 ↗ them but in Old Town several years ago

1:20:33 ↗ we had an artist make bike racks for us

1:20:36 ↗ and they all represent different

1:20:38 ↗ elements of Old Town and one represents

1:20:41 ↗ the water

1:20:42 ↗ it's kind of a pebble fell in the water

1:20:43 ↗ and it's the ripples another one

1:20:46 ↗ represents it's a fern

1:20:48 ↗ different firms and so it represents the

1:20:50 ↗ greenery in the trailheads and the last

1:20:52 ↗ one took me awhile is a thumbprint but

1:20:55 ↗ for the people who live here but they're

1:20:57 ↗ all made out of the same materials of

1:20:59 ↗ the same shape they're all related but

1:21:01 ↗ they represent different parts of Old

1:21:02 ↗ Town is that kind of where you're going

1:21:04 ↗ what they need to be similar and well I

1:21:06 ↗ do first place I like Joy's idea of

1:21:10 ↗ getting the Arts Commission involved in

1:21:13 ↗ this I mean I'm really leery of

1:21:15 ↗ bureaucrats with all due respect

1:21:17 ↗ deciding what art is gonna be I so I

1:21:21 ↗ think that's a really good really good

1:21:25 ↗ addition to it that if again if there is

1:21:30 ↗ one defining thing for for this place it

1:21:34 ↗ seems to me to be the salmon and so if

1:21:40 ↗ we're going to have different messages

1:21:41 ↗ or different symbols on the different

1:21:44 ↗ gateways that doesn't seem to be as

1:21:46 ↗ effective to me as having the same

1:21:49 ↗ symbol regardless of whether again if

1:21:51 ↗ it's an arch or a rock with it

1:21:54 ↗ salmon carved into it or something like

1:21:56 ↗ that but but this is this old town is

1:21:59 ↗ where this takes place and this is

1:22:01 ↗ really our identity and it's part of the

1:22:03 ↗ curriculum for the school district and

1:22:07 ↗ yeah the Randy's point what's the theme

1:22:10 ↗ I think right now there is no theme and

1:22:14 ↗ and the reason why we've brought this up

1:22:16 ↗ is because there's plan guidance to deal

1:22:20 ↗ with this and then in the existing

1:22:21 ↗ standards it actually calls out parcels

1:22:24 ↗ to say these are gateways the design

1:22:27 ↗ should respond and so we were looking at

1:22:29 ↗ it saying hmm is this something we want

1:22:30 ↗ to carry over into the updated guideline

1:22:33 ↗ or standards and then looking at the

1:22:35 ↗ plan that it wasn't that specific we

1:22:38 ↗ thought it was valuable to have that

1:22:40 ↗ conversation and get your feedback and

1:22:42 ↗ what I'm hearing is this is probably

1:22:44 ↗ more suited to you know Arts Commission

1:22:47 ↗ having some more and a cohesive

1:22:50 ↗ discussion about what these are rather

1:22:53 ↗ than codifying them in terms of actual

1:22:55 ↗ standards and guidelines to you know

1:22:57 ↗ what needs to happen and I know you're

1:22:59 ↗ gonna go to public comment I mean not

1:23:01 ↗ here but public feedback in terms of

1:23:05 ↗ what the themes should be but I getting

1:23:08 ↗ the different Commission's like the

1:23:10 ↗ Parks Commission the Arts Commission dia

1:23:13 ↗ it's involved in trying to come up with

1:23:15 ↗ what is the theme of Issaquah what do we

1:23:18 ↗ want to brand ourselves as and then use

1:23:21 ↗ that as the gateway themes and that may

1:23:25 ↗ actually dictate what these archways are

1:23:28 ↗ going to be we may have more than

1:23:30 ↗ one style of archway but I think the

1:23:32 ↗ point we need to figure out is where do

1:23:35 ↗ we want gateways rather than what do we

1:23:38 ↗ want them to look like at this phase

1:23:40 ↗ because we don't know what it's going to

1:23:42 ↗ look like because we haven't even

1:23:43 ↗ decided what our branding is going to be

1:23:45 ↗ yet and it's even probably another step

1:23:48 ↗ but but like whereas does do you want

1:23:52 ↗ the Gateway to be a public project where

1:23:56 ↗ it's in the public right-of-way and its

1:23:57 ↗ publicly funded and it goes through the

1:23:59 ↗ Arts Commission or do you want to create

1:24:01 ↗ additional standards for the private

1:24:03 ↗ development to support for mark that

1:24:05 ↗ gateway and I think right now the

1:24:07 ↗ current standards say if there is a

1:24:09 ↗ public Gateway then the building or the

1:24:12 ↗ architecture should respond to it but it

1:24:15 ↗ doesn't necessarily say you have to the

1:24:18 ↗ building doesn't have to be the Gateway

1:24:19 ↗ so we're just trying to figure out how

1:24:21 ↗ do we want to codify this topic yeah I

1:24:27 ↗ the way I think this is going to work

1:24:30 ↗ actually is that it is our

1:24:33 ↗ responsibility to recommend to the mayor

1:24:36 ↗ and the council the PPC you know what

1:24:41 ↗ what we think things as big as the

1:24:44 ↗ themes ought to be so when I and I don't

1:24:48 ↗ know joy had this in mind but I didn't

1:24:51 ↗ intend to imply that the arts and of the

1:24:54 ↗ Arts Commission should decide what the

1:24:56 ↗ theme is I think that that should come

1:24:59 ↗ to them and then they would do their

1:25:03 ↗ recommendations to the council and the

1:25:05 ↗ mayor and maybe even come back through a

1:25:08 ↗ public hearing with a PPC but I think

1:25:11 ↗ that's that's the city that's our job to

1:25:15 ↗ recommend what we think the theme of the

1:25:18 ↗ gateways should be and whether or not it

1:25:21 ↗ should be one you know a different one

1:25:23 ↗ for each gateway or one that's

1:25:25 ↗ reinforced by all of them and I wonder

1:25:27 ↗ if we're talking really about gateways

1:25:30 ↗ for this particular sub area or gateways

1:25:32 ↗ for Issaquah well the other sub areas

1:25:34 ↗ then have defined gateways just like

1:25:36 ↗ this you know we multiplying lots of

1:25:38 ↗ gateways here are we really talking

1:25:40 ↗ about what's symbolic and brand

1:25:43 ↗ significant for his equal yeah that's a

1:25:46 ↗ good point because maybe we want if we

1:25:48 ↗ get st3 coming into town and we have an

1:25:51 ↗ arch we have a bridge going over the

1:25:55 ↗ freeway maybe that becomes the Gateway

1:25:57 ↗ to is a and then we have a gateway to

1:26:00 ↗ Old Town which is different it's a sub

1:26:05 ↗ marketing it's a it's an area of town

1:26:07 ↗ that we're gonna market differently than

1:26:09 ↗ we would is a quad do you mind going

1:26:12 ↗ back to the East real quick I think one

1:26:15 ↗ one thing we haven't touched on

1:26:16 ↗ specifically to the easterly gateway is

1:26:18 ↗ that a lot of people are coming into our

1:26:20 ↗ community from there and are moving

1:26:23 ↗ through okay and they're coming through

1:26:25 ↗ a pretty sensitive part of Old Town so I

1:26:27 ↗ unfortunately had to miss the traffic

1:26:29 ↗ calming meeting that was in the Eagle

1:26:31 ↗ room prior to this but we all know that

1:26:33 ↗ coming into these neighborhoods we want

1:26:35 ↗ to give the impression that you are in a

1:26:38 ↗ special place please slow down

1:26:40 ↗ so this gateway is actually services in

1:26:45 ↗ a different way rather than kind of

1:26:46 ↗ saying this is who we are in character

1:26:48 ↗ it also has a function it also has a

1:26:51 ↗ function because of where it's situated

1:26:52 ↗ right next to coming off of the 90

1:26:54 ↗ people coming in again through other

1:26:56 ↗ communities through the Highlands and

1:26:57 ↗ passing through and right now the way

1:26:59 ↗ that you kind of get that is a flashing

1:27:01 ↗ sign telling you you're going over 25 so

1:27:04 ↗ wouldn't it be nice if we said that in a

1:27:06 ↗ different way so gateways can also be

1:27:08 ↗ functional they can also encourage

1:27:10 ↗ safety they don't also they can be

1:27:12 ↗ beautiful it can be a big piece of

1:27:13 ↗ assault but we can see how often

1:27:16 ↗ truckers hit I mean I think there can be

1:27:17 ↗ a lot of things but it can also be a

1:27:19 ↗ functional way to help communicate to

1:27:21 ↗ drivers that you are entering a place

1:27:23 ↗ that is different than where you've been

1:27:25 ↗ and so I think that for the east that's

1:27:26 ↗ a very important thing to think about as

1:27:29 ↗ we design something for that space

1:27:31 ↗ you know your discussions your public

1:27:33 ↗ meetings we've had public input we've

1:27:36 ↗ talked about theme here and we were

1:27:38 ↗ imposing some of our ideas

1:27:41 ↗ discussion has there is there have you

1:27:43 ↗ been given it can you clay ideas coming

1:27:47 ↗ from those who live in the area but what

1:27:49 ↗ it means to be in Old Town have you got

1:27:52 ↗ themes that we could play off of and say

1:27:55 ↗ ah those are that's what it means to

1:27:57 ↗ those who live here or come through here

1:28:00 ↗ regularly right now if you rather a

1:28:02 ↗ divorce from that whole in isolation

1:28:06 ↗ here talking in the room yeah we haven't

1:28:09 ↗ we haven't heard any themes yes no when

1:28:13 ↗ we haven't asked we yeah and we haven't

1:28:15 ↗ asked that would be a good reason why um

1:28:18 ↗ so I look forward to hearing something

1:28:19 ↗ tonight

1:28:20 ↗ most of our discussions recently have

1:28:22 ↗ been on the single-family areas because

1:28:24 ↗ that's so new to us and we want people

1:28:26 ↗ to be sure that they're comfortable with

1:28:27 ↗ what happens to houses so that's been

1:28:30 ↗ the primary discussion there but I look

1:28:32 ↗ forward to hearing it when during that

1:28:33 ↗ yeah maybe hopefully three brother

1:28:35 ↗ comments people yeah for Ron's comment

1:28:37 ↗ yeah right yeah I agree and it seems

1:28:54 ↗ like that there'd be value and having a

1:28:56 ↗ discussion just around this topic that's

1:28:59 ↗ separate from the standards and I think

1:29:02 ↗ from how the the planned policy is

1:29:05 ↗ written it's a little vague to where

1:29:08 ↗ there's a disconnect between the actual

1:29:10 ↗ standards and the policy that I think

1:29:11 ↗ having a broader discussion me with

1:29:13 ↗ other Commission's as well to see and

1:29:16 ↗ you know coupling it with the traffic

1:29:18 ↗ calming I think is a great idea so I

1:29:21 ↗ think we can brainstorm as a project

1:29:24 ↗ team and the next time we come back we

1:29:26 ↗ can have some you know steps to how we

1:29:28 ↗ can do this to get people's involvement

1:29:31 ↗ as well because I don't want us to

1:29:34 ↗ pretend like we're coming up with the

1:29:36 ↗ theme for the gateways tonight and I

1:29:38 ↗ think it's you know much more important

1:29:41 ↗ of a conversation I just want to

1:29:45 ↗ Richard's comment I don't see gateways

1:29:49 ↗ hither thither in yarn

1:29:51 ↗ I mean it seems to me that what we're

1:29:54 ↗ doing here today is old town and helping

1:29:57 ↗ people understand old town as opposed to

1:30:01 ↗ the commercial district or the central

1:30:03 ↗ district or the Highlands or something

1:30:05 ↗ like that I I think that's a really good

1:30:06 ↗ question that's an obvious question but

1:30:08 ↗ I my take on that would be no we're just

1:30:10 ↗ if we're gonna do gateways it's just

1:30:12 ↗ gonna be and and the East Gateway

1:30:15 ↗ frankly and the North Gateway are so

1:30:19 ↗ close to 90 that they function is

1:30:21 ↗ welcome to Issaquah markers anyway so

1:30:25 ↗ and this is from the old town plan you

1:30:29 ↗ know so the city policy is specific to

1:30:31 ↗ Old Town - so the one comment that I

1:30:36 ↗ guess an answered your question about

1:30:37 ↗ should we have those properties be zoned

1:30:40 ↗ that way or the requirements my thought

1:30:42 ↗ would be the to keep those bid as

1:30:45 ↗ allowing them to have gateway features

1:30:48 ↗ that might be different than the rest of

1:30:50 ↗ all town but not requiring them to have

1:30:54 ↗ gateway features and make them be forced

1:30:57 ↗ to have a public announcement on their

1:31:00 ↗ property the city wants to put up

1:31:02 ↗ signage artwork that can be what they do

1:31:04 ↗ if these people aren't incorporated in

1:31:06 ↗ those locations allow them to do that so

1:31:10 ↗ quick question to that because I like

1:31:13 ↗ where he's going with that what if we

1:31:14 ↗ did a co-branding effort with a

1:31:17 ↗ landowner who wanted to develop a

1:31:20 ↗ building and we'd say we want to build

1:31:23 ↗ an archway we want this to or we want

1:31:25 ↗ this to be a gateway we would throw

1:31:28 ↗ money to you to help you build a

1:31:30 ↗ building that would be a gateway to our

1:31:34 ↗ art community in that way we we get

1:31:37 ↗ something and they get something and the

1:31:41 ↗ end product is we get a great gateway

1:31:42 ↗ experience okay so I think having that

1:31:47 ↗ might be a good solution but I think the

1:31:49 ↗ buildings need to match sort of the

1:31:50 ↗ Gateway experience

1:31:56 ↗ the last gateway before we move on just

1:31:59 ↗ to close this conversation is South

1:32:02 ↗ gateway the pool area so that definitely

1:32:09 ↗ has a different different look and feel

1:32:11 ↗ and character but I think we can move on

1:32:14 ↗ to ad use and the ditions if we've

1:32:16 ↗ discussed this enough great so to start

1:32:23 ↗ with additions I think the framing

1:32:25 ↗ conversation here is what size or what

1:32:30 ↗ amount of value of addition should

1:32:35 ↗ respond to the standards does every

1:32:38 ↗ addition need to abide by the standards

1:32:40 ↗ or is there some threshold so that's I

1:32:44 ↗ think the highest level question we have

1:32:46 ↗ for you I think it's the zoning right

1:32:49 ↗ now that has a value so if it's 50% of

1:32:52 ↗ the value of the property then you have

1:32:54 ↗ to come into compliance with to the best

1:32:56 ↗ extent possible so the best extent

1:32:58 ↗ positive centralized so that's just kind

1:33:00 ↗ of a starting point to think about does

1:33:04 ↗ that make sense to look at this from a

1:33:07 ↗ value perspective or do you want to

1:33:09 ↗ think about additions in terms of square

1:33:11 ↗ feet or presence on the street and this

1:33:14 ↗ example over here these were just if you

1:33:17 ↗ go back in in Google Street View I think

1:33:20 ↗ this is from you know 2008 or something

1:33:22 ↗ and then it's the same property now so

1:33:25 ↗ you can see what you know some one

1:33:28 ↗ property has done already where you know

1:33:30 ↗ it pops the top and expands so how do we

1:33:35 ↗ want to deal with with additions I'll

1:33:39 ↗ run through some some pictures just to

1:33:41 ↗ frame these questions a bit more so when

1:33:44 ↗ we talk about additions do you want to

1:33:47 ↗ have any sort of character stylistic

1:33:50 ↗ standards to to the addition so for

1:33:54 ↗ example these two pictures our houses

1:33:57 ↗ that were added on to but it was done in

1:34:00 ↗ a way that it appears to be one cohesive

1:34:02 ↗ design whereas this option down here you

1:34:06 ↗ could see that the ground floor

1:34:08 ↗ had one character in style and then the

1:34:10 ↗ addition has a completely different look

1:34:12 ↗ and feel so that's up for discussion

1:34:16 ↗ how how we want to manage this and

1:34:19 ↗ regulate it you want to add something

1:34:20 ↗ well I was going back to the plywood

1:34:22 ↗ example you know say there's an existing

1:34:25 ↗ house that's sitting there and it's made

1:34:27 ↗ of plywood is it best for the edition to

1:34:31 ↗ come in and keep the consistent

1:34:33 ↗ character of the existing house that

1:34:34 ↗ news plywood or do they need to comply

1:34:37 ↗ with something that is allowed as a

1:34:39 ↗ material and do

1:34:41 ↗ I don't know material so I'm looking to

1:34:43 ↗ you it's something else that would be

1:34:48 ↗ allowed you know say if that's just

1:34:50 ↗ another consideration there as part of

1:34:52 ↗ the additions I think I believe that the

1:34:58 ↗ architectural standards are going to

1:34:59 ↗ define the character and the context of

1:35:01 ↗ the facility and so rather than worry

1:35:04 ↗ about a square foot it would seem more

1:35:08 ↗ appropriate to me to say if you've

1:35:09 ↗ changed the context or character you

1:35:11 ↗ need to you need to comply you know the

1:35:13 ↗ point the point is to maintain that

1:35:15 ↗ eclectic character and so I can see

1:35:18 ↗ where you could add a 10 by 10 garage on

1:35:21 ↗ the front of your house that's not what

1:35:23 ↗ you want you could put a 10 by 10 garage

1:35:25 ↗ on the back of your house and you

1:35:26 ↗ haven't changed the context or character

1:35:28 ↗ and it seems like that would be more

1:35:30 ↗ than appropriate right so I don't know

1:35:32 ↗ that you I think it would be really

1:35:34 ↗ perilous to go down the square foot yep

1:35:38 ↗ so you're thinking more if it's visible

1:35:39 ↗ from the street you know that might be

1:35:41 ↗ one threshold if you know for instance

1:35:44 ↗ if it's on the side of a house then then

1:35:46 ↗ that might be more conducive to

1:35:49 ↗ standards well rather than if it's

1:35:52 ↗ behind it and my table in with the table

1:36:02 ↗ I was at we're all about what was

1:36:04 ↗ visible from the front there was some

1:36:05 ↗ discussion of the alley and where to

1:36:07 ↗ have the garage but everything else was

1:36:09 ↗ I think really about the image from the

1:36:13 ↗ front so we followed along with that

1:36:14 ↗ theme and perhaps that's a way to solve

1:36:17 ↗ this problem

1:36:19 ↗ focus on the front and they decide

1:36:22 ↗ couldn't be more treatment besides could

1:36:25 ↗ be more flexible doesn't get to the

1:36:26 ↗ plywood issue but it does at least say

1:36:29 ↗ that focus is on that image from the

1:36:31 ↗ street image I would almost treat all

1:36:36 ↗ sides equally I think it's important to

1:36:39 ↗ keep you know keep in mind the neighbors

1:36:41 ↗ obviously you know what's being affected

1:36:44 ↗ on there and just a clarification

1:36:48 ↗ Samantha on that the 50% value so

1:36:51 ↗ currently as it stands less than 50%

1:36:53 ↗ value design standards don't apply is

1:36:57 ↗ that correct

1:36:58 ↗ that's for zoning great it is right now

1:37:04 ↗ there are no standards there's no

1:37:05 ↗ standards right now okay so once we have

1:37:10 ↗ standards then that's a question you

1:37:12 ↗ know should they apply or or not is that

1:37:15 ↗ even the right metric or do we want to

1:37:18 ↗ have other criteria I'm an agreement to

1:37:21 ↗ try to keep things uniform you know

1:37:23 ↗ based on the style and the standards I

1:37:25 ↗ think seeing two three houses stitched

1:37:29 ↗ together isn't quite pleasing I I've

1:37:33 ↗ actually seen a few developments like

1:37:34 ↗ that in Seattle and I always wonder as I

1:37:36 ↗ walk past them what what the reason was

1:37:38 ↗ but but I think you know back to that

1:37:42 ↗ conversation I think it's important to

1:37:43 ↗ be mindful of all all elevations all

1:37:47 ↗ sides of a building whether it's an

1:37:48 ↗ alley street or your adjacent neighbor

1:37:51 ↗ so when you say keep things uniform keep

1:37:54 ↗ them uniform with what's existing or

1:37:56 ↗ keep things bring things into compliance

1:37:58 ↗ so that they're all uniform with

1:38:00 ↗ standards it's a good question I think a

1:38:09 ↗ good question I kind of think about that

1:38:14 ↗ if they were like recited their house

1:38:16 ↗ then they added an addition then they

1:38:19 ↗ would resize their whole house with that

1:38:21 ↗ material but if they didn't want to if

1:38:23 ↗ they didn't want to cover the expenses

1:38:25 ↗ then they would be they would have to

1:38:27 ↗ comply with matching what's already

1:38:28 ↗ existing right

1:38:29 ↗ thing like that because to the point

1:38:31 ↗ about stitching them together those

1:38:33 ↗ pictures are horrifying yeah newah t is

1:38:36 ↗ really important here and especially

1:38:37 ↗ because right now we're talking about

1:38:38 ↗ editions which makes it really easy on

1:38:40 ↗ the eye I think there was a image you

1:38:42 ↗ had of number four we have this Tudor

1:38:43 ↗ and the modern and it makes me cringe a

1:38:45 ↗ little bit and so let's movies like to

1:38:49 ↗ me the hypothetical then moves to a tu

1:38:50 ↗ which is something we want to encourage

1:38:52 ↗ okay it's important that we build these

1:38:54 ↗ in a way we're not saying you have to

1:38:56 ↗ build the Tudor but they should have to

1:38:58 ↗ pick one or the other so if we decide

1:39:00 ↗ that we are not going to say that once

1:39:04 ↗ you do in addition that you now need to

1:39:06 ↗ fit to the design standards if we don't

1:39:08 ↗ go that path then we need to think about

1:39:10 ↗ 80 uses saying there needs to be

1:39:12 ↗ continuity to the property so that there

1:39:15 ↗ again isn't all this hodgepodge of

1:39:17 ↗ collected just crammed into these little

1:39:18 ↗ spaces which is easy to do when you

1:39:21 ↗ think about hey how cheaply can I put a

1:39:22 ↗ little shed on a little heater if I run

1:39:25 ↗ you know I mean how basic and minimum

1:39:27 ↗ can we get when you start I'm gonna add

1:39:29 ↗ a composting toilet I mean I mean you

1:39:31 ↗ can start building a tea use in a way

1:39:33 ↗ that can really change the character of

1:39:35 ↗ a neighborhood and we've seen in Seattle

1:39:36 ↗ there's been a big uproar to that for

1:39:38 ↗ the very reason of this foresight some

1:39:40 ↗ concept that we're in a community we are

1:39:42 ↗ neighbors we do share fences and walls

1:39:45 ↗ and so there has to be some sort of what

1:39:48 ↗ exists in place and how do you match

1:39:51 ↗ that because not every home does look

1:39:53 ↗ the same and so there needs to be a

1:39:55 ↗ character that gets preserved per

1:39:56 ↗ property as well

1:39:58 ↗ so I just wanted to make sure we're

1:40:00 ↗ clear so most likely if we adopt

1:40:04 ↗ standards for architecture for

1:40:07 ↗ single-family most of the most of the

1:40:09 ↗ homes are not going to comply completely

1:40:11 ↗ so so those in some way shape or form

1:40:14 ↗ they will probably out of compliance

1:40:15 ↗ with the new standards so if you do an

1:40:18 ↗ addition the choices are either the

1:40:20 ↗ addition doesn't comply because we

1:40:23 ↗ wanted to be consistent with the

1:40:25 ↗ existing non-compliant house or you make

1:40:28 ↗ the addition comply which now makes it

1:40:30 ↗ not exactly match the existing house or

1:40:34 ↗ you say you now have to if you want to

1:40:37 ↗ do in addition you now have to make your

1:40:38 ↗ house comply so those are your three

1:40:40 ↗ choices

1:40:42 ↗ and obviously there's a fiscal impact to

1:40:45 ↗ whichever one of those choices you want

1:40:48 ↗ to pick but you need to think about the

1:40:49 ↗ cost and the aesthetics when you think

1:40:53 ↗ about those three choices I just want to

1:40:54 ↗ make sure that guys we're thinking about

1:40:56 ↗ that holistically Keith can I ask you

1:40:59 ↗ just for clarification homeowners in

1:41:02 ↗ this area now that are want to make a

1:41:07 ↗ change or in addition to their property

1:41:10 ↗ that goes they have to go to the city

1:41:13 ↗ would you define what the jurisdiction

1:41:16 ↗ is in terms of because as I recall and I

1:41:19 ↗ just asked Richard this you don't if

1:41:22 ↗ you're a homeowner and you want to put

1:41:24 ↗ an addition on your house or you want to

1:41:26 ↗ remodel it or whatever it doesn't come

1:41:28 ↗ before the Development Commission it's

1:41:29 ↗ unplanted

1:41:30 ↗ it's already on planted land so this is

1:41:32 ↗ not a DC level issue that needs to be

1:41:37 ↗ kind of clarified so right now in Old

1:41:40 ↗ Town so if you were so so this is where

1:41:43 ↗ we have some different rules in

1:41:45 ↗ different parts of the city but in like

1:41:47 ↗ in the highlands if you want to do in

1:41:49 ↗ addition there is an architecture review

1:41:51 ↗ committee as joi alluded to earlier it's

1:41:54 ↗ not City run it's it's administered

1:41:56 ↗ through the covenants and the Community

1:41:59 ↗ Association of the highlands talus has

1:42:01 ↗ the same thing for Old Town if you want

1:42:03 ↗ to do an addition you bring your plans

1:42:05 ↗ into City Hall Northwest we review them

1:42:09 ↗ against zoning code only we don't we

1:42:12 ↗ don't we don't judge aesthetics and and

1:42:15 ↗ you get your permit based on that this

1:42:17 ↗ would add a new layer and we haven't

1:42:19 ↗ even talked about if we were to do this

1:42:21 ↗ who's gonna then be the Czar of

1:42:24 ↗ aesthetics for Old Town that's a whole

1:42:28 ↗ other conversation which we would need

1:42:30 ↗ to figure out at some point so this is a

1:42:34 ↗ question to Keith so before Randy's

1:42:37 ↗ question what would be your

1:42:39 ↗ recommendation for how to handle us

1:42:41 ↗ because if I was a landowner and Old

1:42:45 ↗ Town and that might be soon and if I

1:42:48 ↗ wanted to either convert a house or

1:42:53 ↗ in addition to an existing house then

1:42:57 ↗ from a cost standpoint am I gonna have

1:42:59 ↗ to bring the whole house up to standard

1:43:02 ↗ or just the addition I mean because you

1:43:07 ↗ start changing the whole house now you

1:43:10 ↗ have a huge cost burden that you may not

1:43:13 ↗ be able to write it's it's a huge

1:43:15 ↗ impediment to people expanding in place

1:43:18 ↗ so that's if you guys are pointed in

1:43:20 ↗ that direction we're gonna have to have

1:43:22 ↗ a serious conversation about the

1:43:24 ↗ limitations that that would put on Old

1:43:26 ↗ Town residents and and you know we could

1:43:29 ↗ probably do a straw vote today and I'm

1:43:31 ↗ gonna guess most - you would probably

1:43:32 ↗ land in the right space but we can talk

1:43:34 ↗ about that that's part of that equation

1:43:36 ↗ if we want to just go down the rabbit

1:43:39 ↗ hole for a second on who might review

1:43:42 ↗ these guidelines and compliance with

1:43:44 ↗ these guidelines again I'm not going to

1:43:46 ↗ suggest a preferred alternative I'm

1:43:48 ↗ gonna say that there are choices the

1:43:50 ↗ first choice would be we could choose

1:43:53 ↗ Development Commission okay that's one

1:43:55 ↗ choice are we gonna vote on that second

1:43:59 ↗ second choice would be staff third

1:44:03 ↗ choice is you know we could try to

1:44:07 ↗ organize an Old Town architecture review

1:44:10 ↗ committee that would be made up of

1:44:12 ↗ residents who live in Old Town that

1:44:13 ↗ would be on parallel with like the

1:44:15 ↗ Highlands and Tallis where people who

1:44:18 ↗ live there would actually form a

1:44:20 ↗ committee and everything would then run

1:44:23 ↗ through them so so there's choices we

1:44:25 ↗ would have to you know at some point

1:44:27 ↗ later on we'll talk about you know if

1:44:30 ↗ there's a preferred recommendation from

1:44:32 ↗ this group on which one of those choices

1:44:34 ↗ make the most sense but there's choices

1:44:36 ↗ so I think there's choices on how

1:44:40 ↗ editions are handled and editions would

1:44:42 ↗ include ad use there's choices on who

1:44:45 ↗ ultimately is the reviewing body so

1:44:48 ↗ those are things that again as we start

1:44:50 ↗ to and part of some of those decisions

1:44:53 ↗ Ron I think will become may be clearer

1:44:56 ↗ depending on how far down the totem pole

1:44:58 ↗ we want to regulate I mean if all we're

1:45:00 ↗ doing is regulating no flat roofs and

1:45:03 ↗ you know it's gonna be one of these

1:45:04 ↗ colors that's fairly easy and you guys

1:45:06 ↗ might say well staff can do that that's

1:45:08 ↗ a check the box kind of thing

1:45:10 ↗ the farther down the totem pole we get

1:45:12 ↗ the the more its I'm gonna suggest it's

1:45:15 ↗ not staff and and then we're gonna need

1:45:17 ↗ to talk Richard about DC because if it's

1:45:20 ↗ a huge workload item house DC going to

1:45:22 ↗ manage that

1:45:23 ↗ right so those are some of the nuances

1:45:26 ↗ we're gonna have to talk about when when

1:45:28 ↗ we get to the right space just a quick

1:45:32 ↗ follow up comment so I appreciate

1:45:34 ↗ Keith's comments so I without having the

1:45:36 ↗ regulations in place it's kind of hard

1:45:38 ↗ to make some judgments here about the

1:45:40 ↗ threshold but also just just thinking

1:45:42 ↗ about back to my original comment how

1:45:45 ↗ much of what we have in in old town do

1:45:48 ↗ we want to see change and how much of it

1:45:50 ↗ is it do we want to preserve if we're

1:45:52 ↗ pretty comfortable with what we've got

1:45:53 ↗ there then when it comes to additions

1:45:56 ↗ and remodels to buildings

1:45:57 ↗ maintaining the architectural style or

1:46:01 ↗ compatibility is probably fine but if we

1:46:04 ↗ want to start to kind of push the

1:46:06 ↗ buildings to whatever the new standard

1:46:08 ↗ is then you want to set a threshold that

1:46:10 ↗ says well when you trip this threshold

1:46:12 ↗ 50% of the value or 50% of the building

1:46:15 ↗ area or whatever you whatever the choice

1:46:17 ↗ is it drives the new regulation it says

1:46:20 ↗ now you need to upgrade your property to

1:46:22 ↗ comply with our new standards so I think

1:46:24 ↗ part of it it's a bit of a judgement

1:46:26 ↗ call them that will really be driven by

1:46:29 ↗ what the level of regulation is that's

1:46:31 ↗ decided on here I think and and as far

1:46:35 ↗ as the we're just since I've got the

1:46:37 ↗ microphone where it goes

1:46:38 ↗ development Commission we're pretty busy

1:46:40 ↗ so I'm thinking maybe planning and

1:46:45 ↗ policy up is here you guys so the I

1:46:48 ↗ think staff clearly this is a staff

1:46:51 ↗ level would be my recommendation again

1:46:54 ↗ it depends on the regulate level of

1:46:55 ↗ regulation the next choice would be you

1:46:57 ↗ have the community help regulate itself

1:46:59 ↗ in that particular part of the city so

1:47:01 ↗ those would be my suggestion

1:47:05 ↗ I can't jump in real quick with

1:47:08 ↗ something so to go off of Michael's

1:47:10 ↗ comment something I was interested about

1:47:12 ↗ our meeting tonight was this kind of

1:47:13 ↗ cross dialogue between our Commission's

1:47:15 ↗ so we had part of the responsibility of

1:47:18 ↗ designating you guys as a person to take

1:47:21 ↗ over you VDC and as we grandfathered in

1:47:24 ↗ these parts of the city and said well

1:47:27 ↗ you know can't can't no to city staff

1:47:29 ↗ saying what you know what and where can

1:47:30 ↗ this and be absorbed and you guys got

1:47:32 ↗ that and I think it's an interesting

1:47:33 ↗ question to say how has your workloads

1:47:37 ↗ changed and how have you guys find that

1:47:39 ↗ it's been helpful as we've put in these

1:47:43 ↗ design standards it was a big deal a lot

1:47:46 ↗ of work went into it and it kind of

1:47:47 ↗ having this perspective from you guys of

1:47:49 ↗ saying how is this working all right how

1:47:51 ↗ are you guys actually finding that doing

1:47:54 ↗ something like we're trying to do an Old

1:47:56 ↗ Town has made a difference I'd be

1:47:57 ↗ curious to see from your guys's

1:47:59 ↗ standpoint you know we work on the code

1:48:01 ↗ but you guys got to live with it

1:48:02 ↗ so how has been living with it then last

1:48:06 ↗ year we had 19 meetings for shelter

1:48:08 ↗ would one just about every other week

1:48:12 ↗ and so so it's hard to it's hard it's

1:48:16 ↗ just been one project and the

1:48:18 ↗ consequence was it was it was a big

1:48:20 ↗ workload I think it's hard to really

1:48:22 ↗ make an evaluation because that was such

1:48:25 ↗ a dominant piece of work and I do think

1:48:30 ↗ the the evergreen Ford dealership was an

1:48:32 ↗ interesting test case for us certainly

1:48:34 ↗ because it was in terms of the central

1:48:37 ↗ Issaquah design standards trying to fit

1:48:39 ↗ that into a car dealership in the

1:48:42 ↗ location they were in it was not the

1:48:46 ↗ easiest one to work with so for anybody

1:48:51 ↗ and the Gilman lofts project was another

1:48:53 ↗ interesting application there because it

1:48:56 ↗ wasn't exactly specifically two

1:48:59 ↗ guidelines but it was an interesting

1:49:01 ↗ creative spin on one of the

1:49:05 ↗ architectural styles that we had urban

1:49:07 ↗ Grange so is I think is very helpful to

1:49:10 ↗ have that

1:49:12 ↗ you and I I would just add that I think

1:49:16 ↗ we because because of the work that we

1:49:18 ↗ did on the standards and guides for the

1:49:20 ↗ development Commission we are way far

1:49:21 ↗ ahead of getting what we want you know

1:49:25 ↗ and so I just encouraged that that

1:49:27 ↗ process is really important and it it

1:49:30 ↗ really boils down to acknowledging that

1:49:32 ↗ you can be really specific or not quite

1:49:35 ↗ so specific and having that dialogue

1:49:36 ↗ because when you're not so specific you

1:49:39 ↗ end up having to talk about it more you

1:49:40 ↗ know and making some trade off so

1:49:42 ↗ whether it really meets and complies

1:49:43 ↗ with what you want to do or not but the

1:49:46 ↗ standard having a standard an

1:49:48 ↗ appropriate inappropriate kind of

1:49:50 ↗ standard really really is helpful do you

1:49:54 ↗ have examples from other towns where

1:49:57 ↗ you're starting with a an area that's in

1:50:01 ↗ assassins diverse and trying to think

1:50:06 ↗ through whether or not to impose some

1:50:08 ↗ lack of diversity to it do you have us

1:50:13 ↗ think about some of these questions

1:50:16 ↗ which there's no defined answer it's a

1:50:20 ↗ judgment call and very helpful to have

1:50:22 ↗ other experience from other places and

1:50:24 ↗ the results of the processes they went

1:50:28 ↗ through a lot of the examples I have are

1:50:34 ↗ really specific to solving a specific

1:50:36 ↗ problem like there are a lot of

1:50:39 ↗ demolitions or it's in a historic

1:50:42 ↗ district or it's an area that's not

1:50:46 ↗ seeing any development so then we use

1:50:48 ↗ this as a tool to then incentivize and

1:50:51 ↗ start to guide development so Old Town

1:50:53 ↗ is unique in a certain way but I think

1:50:57 ↗ what I'm hearing is really getting very

1:51:00 ↗ clear about what is the most important

1:51:02 ↗ aspects to maintain the character and

1:51:05 ↗ focus on getting those right instead of

1:51:07 ↗ having all this fluffy ambiguous you

1:51:11 ↗ know guidelines that then turn into a

1:51:13 ↗ judgment call and prolong the process

1:51:15 ↗ and then I like the plan of revisiting

1:51:18 ↗ in a year to see if it's working or if

1:51:20 ↗ it's not if we want to tighten things up

1:51:21 ↗ or not but I think

1:51:24 ↗ I think what I'm hearing and I think I

1:51:27 ↗ know I can speak for staff is we don't

1:51:29 ↗ want to create this really long

1:51:30 ↗ drawn-out process for anybody for the

1:51:34 ↗ homeowners for the designers for a staff

1:51:36 ↗ or you guys but we want to make sure

1:51:39 ↗ that we still protect and preserve what

1:51:41 ↗ is most valuable about Old Town yeah

1:51:44 ↗ just for a minute to come back to

1:51:46 ↗ Commissioner Brennan's statement

1:51:47 ↗ regarding identify very high level what

1:51:51 ↗ are the aspects that you really are

1:51:53 ↗ looking to preserve you know and if

1:51:55 ↗ those become your guiding principles and

1:51:57 ↗ you test every single intent statement

1:51:59 ↗ against that then maybe you know you can

1:52:01 ↗ really drive consistency through what

1:52:02 ↗ you're trying to do a good discussion

1:52:08 ↗ thank you all for coming and

1:52:11 ↗ participating as much as you did in I'm

1:52:17 ↗ going to follow the agenda but I'm going

1:52:19 ↗ to be very efficient I think that's what

1:52:23 ↗ we have for tonight um next this all

1:52:26 ↗ blends together let's see next steps so

1:52:30 ↗ on February 25th we are taking this same

1:52:34 ↗ type of discussion to the City Council

1:52:37 ↗ we'll also be talking about the proposed

1:52:40 ↗ land use code amendments that night and

1:52:42 ↗ then we're going to move straight into

1:52:43 ↗ this discussion and let them know same

1:52:47 ↗ things that you heard except that we

1:52:48 ↗ will also include this conversation and

1:52:50 ↗ let them know what we heard here and get

1:52:51 ↗ their feedback on it as well we are not

1:52:54 ↗ expected to put a draft out there until

1:52:57 ↗ June 4th it will be out there for public

1:52:59 ↗ review and then we start that public

1:53:01 ↗ process on June 11th we're going to have

1:53:03 ↗ another joint development commission and

1:53:05 ↗ planning policy commission meeting may

1:53:07 ↗ have another meeting in there to talk

1:53:08 ↗ about these and then July 19th we're

1:53:12 ↗ expected to have a public hearing the

1:53:14 ↗ 11th would be a council study session

1:53:16 ↗ and then these were these will be

1:53:17 ↗ adopted as part of the title 18 update

1:53:20 ↗ it'll be incorporated into that will

1:53:21 ↗ have a complete document for you all to

1:53:23 ↗ look at and to make a recommendation on

1:53:25 ↗ but it'll be incorporated into title 18

1:53:28 ↗ that is the proposed schedule I think

1:53:33 ↗ that's I think that covers all the

1:53:35 ↗ announcements any other things that we

1:53:36 ↗ have

1:53:37 ↗ that means it's finally time for

1:53:39 ↗ audience comments so when you come up if

1:53:42 ↗ you would just give us your name that's

1:53:44 ↗ all we need be great any takers

1:53:54 ↗ I changed it what not one but not the

1:53:58 ↗ other July he's 20 hello I'm Bill Frey

1:54:01 ↗ singer I live in old town on Bush Street

1:54:05 ↗ and the initial discussion he said

1:54:08 ↗ you're gonna concentrate on you have to

1:54:11 ↗ carry the categories because I

1:54:12 ↗ suggestions and required and talked to

1:54:15 ↗ that they're gonna just initially with

1:54:16 ↗ this required then it's not like most of

1:54:19 ↗ stuff what sort of suggests to me my

1:54:21 ↗ particular concern is the color require

1:54:24 ↗ months you showed an example of the kind

1:54:28 ↗ of rainbow house next I would be

1:54:30 ↗ perfectly fine if he could say well you

1:54:32 ↗ can use one color on that rainbow house

1:54:34 ↗ is the main color and the other one is

1:54:35 ↗ an accent color alright but it's nothing

1:54:38 ↗ like the this sort of earth tones you

1:54:41 ↗ were talking about so I wanna I guess I

1:54:45 ↗ want to emphasize that I want a fairly

1:54:48 ↗ wide choice and colors maybe if it's

1:54:52 ↗ outside of something rather you go

1:54:54 ↗ through some review process or something

1:54:55 ↗ like that but anyway a little bit of

1:54:57 ↗ flexibility there

1:55:01 ↗ the spelling of Old Town by the way I'm

1:55:06 ↗ a horrible speller and if there isn't a

1:55:09 ↗ consistent way to do it I have even more

1:55:11 ↗ problems I mean I was trying to figure

1:55:13 ↗ out what's going on in Old Town so I

1:55:15 ↗ googled Old Town I didn't get anything

1:55:16 ↗ there wasn't spelling town right or was

1:55:20 ↗ it old one spell in one of the words

1:55:21 ↗ right and that's just a personal view on

1:55:25 ↗ that thank you very much

1:55:33 ↗ good evening my name is Ryan Yee and my

1:55:37 ↗ wife and I own a property right on

1:55:40 ↗ sunset way just off second two four five

1:55:45 ↗ since a way we have been in the last

1:55:48 ↗ year looking at trying to redevelop the

1:55:51 ↗ entire property it the property

1:55:54 ↗ currently used is uses as a acupuncture

1:55:57 ↗ office for my wife and massage therapy

1:56:00 ↗ many of you dry pass it better health at

1:56:03 ↗ sunset first of all I'd like to say

1:56:06 ↗ thank you for all of you that volunteer

1:56:07 ↗ your time for the design commission I

1:56:09 ↗ know my volunteer work that I do it

1:56:12 ↗ takes an awful lot of hours and a loft

1:56:14 ↗ awful lot of effort so I really

1:56:16 ↗ appreciate it

1:56:17 ↗ I like to know how many of you anyone

1:56:20 ↗ else that lives in Old Town in the area

1:56:23 ↗ okay great

1:56:25 ↗ any of you live directly on Front Street

1:56:27 ↗ or sunset way right one of the questions

1:56:34 ↗ I really had for the design Commission

1:56:36 ↗ in the city was its those front street

1:56:40 ↗ and sensit way really are completely

1:56:43 ↗ different in the aspect that they are

1:56:48 ↗ part business part private ownership are

1:56:52 ↗ you know looking at our property for

1:56:55 ↗ redevelopment we wanted to maintain the

1:56:58 ↗ acupuncture practice there in the in the

1:57:01 ↗ city but also live above it and a lot of

1:57:06 ↗ building codes I know have gone away

1:57:08 ↗ from that where there's no longer

1:57:11 ↗ families living above their business and

1:57:15 ↗ one of the questions I had is what

1:57:18 ↗ exactly do you want to attract on those

1:57:22 ↗ two main streets of those businesses

1:57:25 ↗ they're all small businesses we don't

1:57:28 ↗ have million dollar building development

1:57:30 ↗ funds we can't build huge complexes I'm

1:57:35 ↗ in the construction business myself I do

1:57:38 ↗ remodels on residential and commercial

1:57:41 ↗ buildings

1:57:42 ↗ and I realize anytime I go down to the

1:57:45 ↗ city on a permit and said we would like

1:57:49 ↗ to add the kitchen into our incorporated

1:57:51 ↗ into our build and realize that we just

1:57:55 ↗ told the homeowner in the city that

1:57:57 ↗ we're adding somewhere between 10 and 40

1:57:59 ↗ thousand dollars to their cause of

1:58:01 ↗ project all of a sudden because of

1:58:04 ↗ whatever codes we need to bring things

1:58:06 ↗ up to or additions that we have to have

1:58:10 ↗ well I also like actually to take a look

1:58:13 ↗ at you know again your front view aspect

1:58:16 ↗ rather than just your all-around view

1:58:18 ↗ aspect one of the thoughts we looked at

1:58:22 ↗ in concept was having a rooftop deck on

1:58:25 ↗ the back side of the the three-story

1:58:27 ↗ house yet if we were required to keep a

1:58:31 ↗ full four view or all four aspect sides

1:58:37 ↗ we would have to have a pitched roof

1:58:39 ↗ something along those lines so we look

1:58:44 ↗ at this and those decisions that you

1:58:46 ↗ make is the flexibility is truly

1:58:49 ↗ important especially as I see

1:58:54 ↗ does anyone else on the design

1:58:56 ↗ Commission have come from a Asian or

1:58:59 ↗ African back graphic background that

1:59:02 ↗ wants to incorporate cultural aspects

1:59:05 ↗ into their business they're building

1:59:07 ↗ their restaurant

1:59:08 ↗ I'm Fung Shui architect attitudes that

1:59:14 ↗ we want to consider I know there we have

1:59:17 ↗ a Japanese spa in the middle of Old Town

1:59:20 ↗ and I know that Japanese look probably

1:59:24 ↗ doesn't fit the criteria of what we have

1:59:28 ↗ for general Old Town standards but I

1:59:34 ↗ encourage yes keep it as recommendations

1:59:37 ↗ leave a lot of flexibility for what

1:59:41 ↗ we're faced with is quite immense I know

1:59:45 ↗ I was probably 10 years back I know

1:59:48 ↗ recognize Michael from when I came upon

1:59:53 ↗ the

1:59:54 ↗ approval for just the front signage of

1:59:57 ↗ our business and we had quite a few fun

2:00:03 ↗ questions just trying to get through is

2:00:06 ↗ this the minimum that we need just to

2:00:10 ↗ have a sign and does it really work

2:00:13 ↗ we also approached in looked and said

2:00:15 ↗ hey we might want to have some sort of

2:00:18 ↗ ramp access from sunset onto our

2:00:21 ↗ property as a business but found out

2:00:26 ↗ that that triggered a traffic

2:00:28 ↗ concurrency study and report in excess

2:00:32 ↗ of 20,000 dollars to build a 25 foot

2:00:35 ↗ long 3-foot wide ramp so as we get into

2:00:41 ↗ this development especially the

2:00:45 ↗ businesses long front sunset way these

2:00:48 ↗ family businesses really have to take a

2:00:51 ↗ look at how but they want to best use it

2:00:55 ↗ the code changes are important the

2:00:59 ↗ parking lot or parking requirement

2:01:01 ↗ changes that we face for instance right

2:01:05 ↗ now we face for every 200 feet of office

2:01:08 ↗ space we have to have a parking space

2:01:10 ↗ and when you were looking at being able

2:01:15 ↗ to increase to 75 percent usage of the

2:01:20 ↗ space which is what's being proposed

2:01:22 ↗ it's a tremendous benefit but would be a

2:01:25 ↗ better benefit for us is not having to

2:01:28 ↗ have as many required parking spaces or

2:01:31 ↗ that square footage so instead of 200

2:01:34 ↗ maybe increasing it to 3 or 400 square

2:01:37 ↗ feet of parking because we really don't

2:01:39 ↗ use that much parking but we're going to

2:01:42 ↗ be required to put it in

2:01:46 ↗ thank you for your time I more than

2:01:48 ↗ happy to answer any questions or

2:01:51 ↗ comments and we'd love to stay involved

2:01:54 ↗ I don't know the exact date when the

2:01:59 ↗ code changes may actually get voted and

2:02:02 ↗ approved but we're waiting to make those

2:02:07 ↗ decisions on our plans as soon as those

2:02:09 ↗ do happen thank you

2:02:18 ↗ is there anyone else who'd like to speak

2:02:27 ↗ anyone else

2:02:31 ↗ there anyone else we'd like to sneak

2:02:35 ↗ right the opportunity is rapidly going

2:02:40 ↗ so in regard to the whole discussion

2:02:43 ↗ about old town I guess I I'm always

2:02:45 ↗ reminded when people start talking about

2:02:47 ↗ spelling of my favorite quote from Mark

2:02:49 ↗ Twain and he says never trust anybody

2:02:51 ↗ can only spell a word one way being

2:02:56 ↗ challenged that way my whole life it's

2:02:58 ↗ been a refreshing so having we

2:03:00 ↗ appreciate the public taking the time to

2:03:02 ↗ make comment and the dialogue was really

2:03:05 ↗ excellent and so at this point let's

2:03:07 ↗ consider ourselves adjourned

2:03:20 ↗ 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 (1)

PPC Commissioners Present: Administrative/

Staff (1)

Richard Sowa, Chair Joan Probala, Chair Trish Heinonen, Planning Policy Mgr. Mel Morgan, Vice Chair Ron Faul, Vice Chair Christen Leeson, Sr. Planner Michael Brennan Janice Carle Keith Niven, Dev. Srv. Dir. Kevin Price Randy Harrison Richard Sanford Joy Lewis Others Present: Arthur Schulte, Alt. Jason Voiss Samantha Suter, Metta Urban Design Commissioners Not Present: Robin Beukers, Alt. Ben Rush (Excused) Commissioners Not Present: Brooke Shore (Excused) Bill Rinehart (Excused)