← Back to City Council Digest

Planning Policy Commission Auto captions

Thursday, August 13, 2020

6:30 PM · 2h 24m
Topic tracked across meetings:
Mobility Master Plan (MMP) Update ID 1507 15/22
Section
1. CALL TO ORDER
1a
Commission Membership
packet pp.3
Staff report:
Planning Policy Commission About Staff Liaison Created in 1983, this commission serves as a Christen Leeson, Senior Planner 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 – Robin Beukers see IMC 18.03.
2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
2a
Minutes of Jul. 9, 2020
packet pp.5–9
Staff report:
APPROVAL OF MINUTES a) 07-09-20 Planning Policy Commission Minutes Page [0000]
2a
Proposed Amendments Establishing Environmental Board and Repealing IMC 18.03, Regarding the River & Streams Board, (A)
Megan Curtis-Murphy, Sustainability Coordinator To make verbal comments, sign up in Submit written comments to · packet pp.11–51
Topics: Land Use
Staff report:
The City Administration is proposing amendments to repeal code provisions that created the River & Streams Board and provide for the River & Streams Board to be dissolved. The proposed amendments also create an Environmental Board to advise the Mayor, City Council and City departments on the City’s plans, policies, regulations and programs relating to the protection of the environment and climate change.
4. REGULAR BUSINESS
4a
Mobility Master Plan Review and Update, (I)
Stephen Padua, Senior Transportation Planner · packet pp.53–292
Topics: Transportation
Staff report:
Following the final report and recommendations from the Traffic Task Force in 2016, City staff pursued the development of a Mobility Master Plan (MMP) to set the City’s vision and provide guidance for all efforts related to the transportation systems. In the process of developing the Capital Improvement Program (CIP) in 2017, the MMP project and staffing support for the newly formalized Transportation Advisory Board was funded.
5. REPORTS
5a
2020 Comprehensive Plan Docket
Christen Leeson, Senior Planner · packet pp.293
Topics: Land Use
Staff report:
Community Planning & Development 1775 – 12th Ave NW | P.O. Box 1307 Issaquah, WA 98027 425-837-3450 issaquahwa.gov
6. OTHER BUSINESS / ANNOUNCEMENTS
6a
Upcoming Schedule
packet pp.295
Staff report:
5/28/20 cancelled 11/26/20 Cancelled (holiday)
0:00 okay so um i'm going to call the meeting
0:03 to order
0:04 at 6 32 p.m this is the august
0:08 13 meeting 13th meeting of the ppc
0:12 um due to the government's proclamation
0:16 20.28 prohibiting meetings that fall
0:18 under the open public meetings act such
0:21 as the planning policy commission
0:24 from being conducted in person tonight's
0:26 meetings will be
0:27 held entirely remotely
0:30 before we begin i would like to
0:34 introduce
0:37 an important member of
0:41 our community i don't see her
0:44 on online but
0:48 the
0:54 council chair
0:58 hunt would like to make a few words a
1:00 few
1:01 uh comments but i don't see her on the
1:08 kristen do you know if she's coming in i
1:10 apologize i missed that what was the
1:12 question
1:13 is uh councilman hunt
1:17 ready to speak is she on the line
1:22 i do not see her on the line um
1:26 i've i will find out about that
1:30 okay to write your ipod yeah i'll find
1:32 out okay
1:33 okay so um we're going to continue on
1:36 with the meeting and
1:37 there are some guidelines that because
1:40 it is the zoom meeting
1:41 they have to be up front and people have
1:43 to know what they are so i'm going to
1:45 read through them so
1:46 commissioners use the chat
1:50 to indicate a desire to speak by typing
1:53 question or comment
1:55 then wait to be acknowledged please do
1:58 not put any substantive
1:59 comments in the chat
2:03 i don't think that any commissioner is
2:05 on the phone but if they were
2:09 please press star 3 and raise your hand
2:12 so that we know that you have a comment
2:15 for everybody else
2:19 well including the commissioners please
2:21 speak clearly
2:22 and pause frequently state your name
2:26 each time before speaking if you've
2:29 watched the council meeting lately you
2:32 will see that
2:34 they do announce themselves every time
2:36 they speak
2:37 um mute your microphone when not
2:39 speaking
2:40 and for those joining us by video your
2:43 microphone is muted when it
2:45 is orange i use the calling and
2:49 call-in information in the meeting
2:51 invite to call
2:52 into the meeting if you are having
2:54 technical difficulties ron
2:57 uh now would i would like to take roll
3:00 call
3:02 and i assume doug is going to take
3:05 rocco
3:13 when your name is called unmute and and
3:16 say here
3:22 i don't have a list of
3:25 uh ppc members i i was not aware that i
3:28 was going to be giving roll calls so
3:31 okay then i'll call roll
3:34 thank you janice carley
3:40 and mute you have to unmute yourself
3:43 sorry i thought i had
3:44 janice carl's here ron fowle
3:51 here joy lewis
3:56 here bill reinhardt here
4:01 jason boyce here
4:05 and robin buchers here
4:10 so we have six people that are here we
4:12 have a quorum
4:14 we are also going to be joined tonight
4:18 by cf d director keith niven
4:21 senior planner kristin leeson
4:24 assistant planner doug yormick
4:27 sustainability coordinator megan curtis
4:30 murphy
4:31 senior transportation planner stephen i
4:34 assume it's padua
4:36 and recording secretary susan lowe
4:42 um is there any objections to approval
4:45 the july 9th meeting
4:47 provided in your agenda back packet
4:56 hearing none the minutes of july the 9th
4:59 are approved
5:02 tonight we're going to start our meeting
5:04 with a
5:05 public eventually a public hearing on
5:08 the proposed amendments establishing
5:10 environmental board and repealing imc
5:14 1803 regarding the river and streamed
5:17 board before we start this stuff
5:22 now i guess we'll start with the staff
5:24 uh presentation so
5:25 if sustainability coordinator megan
5:29 murphy curtis murphy would like to start
5:32 the presentation
5:34 you have the floor
5:40 great thank you very much uh can
5:42 everyone see my screen
5:46 i'll take those yes thank you uh good
5:49 new things i'm megan curtis murphy and i
5:51 work in the office of sustainability
5:53 i'm here tonight to discuss the creation
5:55 of the environmental board
5:57 in the sun setting of the river and
5:58 streams board the proposed amendments to
6:01 title 18 would repeal the code
6:02 provisions that created the rivers
6:04 and streams board and create this new
6:06 environmental board that will advise the
6:08 mayor
6:09 and city council on the protection of
6:11 the environment and climate change
6:16 i will start this evening by providing
6:18 some background on the river and streams
6:20 board
6:20 and then talk about the community
6:22 engagement we have done for the creation
6:24 of the environmental board thus far
6:26 i'll touch on comments we receive from
6:28 city council at the recent work session
6:30 and meeting and present the proposal for
6:33 the environmental
6:34 board i'll finish with next steps
6:36 following the hearing
6:37 or before the hearing this evening
6:42 the river and streams board was formed
6:44 in 1983
6:45 to serve as the advisory body on issues
6:47 related to the environment
6:49 the scope of the board however was
6:50 narrowly defined to technical matters on
6:53 the aquatic environment in issaquah
6:55 this is demonstrated in the objective of
6:57 the board which is to protect
6:59 preserve and enhance the water quality
7:01 in the waterways of issaquah
7:02 and to protect the fish birds and
7:04 mammals that depend upon such aquatic
7:06 environments
7:07 by advising the mayor and city council
7:09 of actions necessary to achieve this end
7:12 when the board was created issaquah had
7:15 about 5 000 people
7:16 and was fairly limited in staff capacity
7:18 to address these sorts of technical
7:20 matters
7:21 to relied on these boards for the
7:22 recommendations in order to provide
7:25 these recommendations on projects
7:26 board members were required to be
7:28 knowledgeable in the life sciences
7:30 hydrology or geology areas as evidenced
7:33 by training
7:34 and or experience
7:37 since the creation of the board there
7:39 has been a lot of changes in the city
7:41 region and environmental issues in
7:42 general the city has grown from a
7:45 population of 5000
7:46 when the board was created to about 40
7:48 000 today
7:50 at the same time there have been a lot
7:52 of updates to environmental regulations
7:54 and review requirements
7:56 with this increase in population and
7:58 requirements city staff has grown
8:00 and increased capacity to help meet this
8:02 demand
8:03 the city also contracts with numerous
8:05 consultants to perform peer review of
8:07 projects
8:08 plans and policies in addition
8:11 residents in our city are passionate
8:12 about the environment which was
8:14 demonstrated through the work on the
8:15 citywide strategic plan
8:17 the topic of environmental stewardship
8:19 have one of the highest levels of
8:21 engagement in the development of the
8:22 plan
8:23 lastly the city itself is addressing a
8:26 greater variety of environmental topics
8:28 including those focusing on the natural
8:30 environment but also looking at ways to
8:33 reduce greenhouse gas emissions
8:35 and involve the community in creating a
8:37 more sustainable issaquah
8:39 with all these changing conditions there
8:41 has been a desire to have a board that
8:43 would address a broader scope of
8:45 environmental topics in the city
8:47 beyond those that were within the scope
8:48 of the river and streams board
8:52 in june the city had two community
8:54 meetings to discuss the development of
8:56 the new board
8:57 we also released a survey to broaden the
8:59 engagement around this topic
9:01 the feedback we received at this meeting
9:04 at these meetings and survey
9:05 helped shape the proposal that we're
9:07 discussing today
9:08 [Music]
9:09 before getting into the details of the
9:11 proposal i'll share a summary of some of
9:13 the comments we heard
9:15 overall the community was very
9:16 supportive of the creation of a new
9:18 board
9:19 throughout the discussion and in the
9:20 survey responses we heard a lot about
9:23 how this
9:24 board should address the overall
9:25 protection of our environment
9:27 as well as discuss climate change issues
9:30 including reducing greenhouse gas
9:31 emissions
9:32 we had several youth attend the meeting
9:34 and participate and participants shared
9:36 that youth engagement and participation
9:38 on the board would be key to its success
9:41 we also heard from community members
9:43 that the board should advocate for the
9:45 environment
9:46 in the items that it reviews and
9:47 provides feedback on
9:49 next we heard it's important to make
9:51 sure that the voices of this board are
9:53 heard by the decision makers
9:55 in response the city proposed that the
9:57 recommendations from the board
9:58 would be tracked and travel with the
10:00 items it reviews
10:01 to ensure that they are considered by
10:03 the decision makers on the project
10:06 there's a lot of discussion about the
10:07 breadth and depth of this board
10:10 comments range from wanting to keep a
10:12 similar scope to the rivers and streams
10:14 board
10:15 to others who wanted to move away from
10:16 that level of technical detail
10:18 in order to incorporate a wider variety
10:20 of topics
10:22 there are also a few areas where the
10:24 community had concern
10:26 the first was around the authority of
10:27 the board and wanting it to have teeth
10:29 in the decision-making process
10:32 the next is the community's concern with
10:34 the impact of development on the
10:35 environment
10:36 some community members want the board to
10:38 review and comment on projects
10:40 whereas other preferred the board focus
10:42 on reviewing and providing
10:44 recommendations
10:44 on overarching policy and regulations
10:50 we brought this proposal to the council
10:51 at the july 14th study session
10:53 to get input into the creation of the
10:55 board and again on august 3rd
10:57 where we shared the draft ordinance as
10:59 an informational update
11:02 as we discussed there was a lot of
11:03 engagement from the community on the
11:05 creation of this board
11:06 and council believes that having this
11:08 level of engagement early in the process
11:10 and reviewing the policies and programs
11:12 will help improve environmental outcomes
11:14 in the city
11:16 similar to the community comments
11:18 there's a lot of discussion from the
11:19 council
11:20 about the best way to approach
11:21 protection of the environment from
11:23 development
11:25 overall there was a preference from
11:26 council to have the board provide a
11:28 higher level advisory role on
11:30 environmental plans and regulations
11:32 than doing permit review but also a
11:34 recognition that we need protections in
11:36 place
11:37 there's discussion on prioritizing and
11:40 updating the title 18 land use
11:42 code so that all projects adhere to
11:44 environmental standards
11:45 addressed through code the city will be
11:48 reconvening to start work on
11:50 that this fall again there is also
11:53 discussion about the interim period
11:55 between river and streams and the new
11:57 board understanding that we do not have
11:59 a quorum for river and streams
12:01 that there's a need to provide some
12:02 oversight on projects now before the
12:04 code can be updated
12:06 the city is proposing a higher level of
12:08 review by the development commission
12:10 including discussion of the state
12:12 environmental policy act or sipa
12:13 analysis at the meeting
12:16 currently staff include a short blurb in
12:18 the staff reports indicating
12:20 cipa has been completed and they attach
12:22 the cipa decision
12:23 the change would be to include more
12:25 information on the cipa analysis
12:27 to facilitate a more detailed discussion
12:29 on cipa at the development commission
12:31 meetings
12:33 we're continuing discussions with the
12:34 community planning and development
12:36 department
12:37 to ensure a more robust conversation
12:39 about the environment occurs at these
12:41 meetings
12:42 we also heard a desire for the
12:44 recommendations to have substantial
12:46 weight
12:46 which has been included in the duties
12:48 and responsibilities that will reveal
12:51 are requests for flowcharts to detail
12:53 the flow of work for the board
12:54 and also include more details such as on
12:57 the annual report and the duties and
12:59 responsibilities
13:00 which will be included in the proposal
13:02 going before the council on september
13:04 8th
13:06 moving on to the proposal i'll start
13:07 with the title of the board
13:10 through conversations with the community
13:12 and council we have proposed calling
13:14 this the environmental board
13:16 the objective of the board as written is
13:18 to advise the mayor
13:19 city council and city departments on the
13:21 plans policies
13:23 regulations and programs relating to the
13:25 protection of the environment and
13:27 climate change
13:29 we've heard some comments to strengthen
13:30 the objective so we'll be proposing some
13:33 stronger language
13:34 for council's next review similar to
13:36 what we've seen in some of the written
13:37 comments for this evening
13:41 this slide reflects the board membership
13:43 that's detailed and the proposed
13:44 amendment
13:46 we tried to capture many of the
13:47 suggestions discussed through the
13:48 engagement process
13:50 the board will have nine members and
13:52 three alternates and two of these
13:53 members will be youth
13:55 although not a requirement for the city
13:57 board we propose the majority our
13:59 residents in issaquah
14:01 we want the board to be diverse in age
14:03 ethnicity
14:04 professions and backgrounds we also want
14:08 to see a variety of expertise on this
14:10 board
14:10 including representatives from the
14:12 natural sciences climate
14:13 engineers sustainability and
14:16 environmental policy
14:18 we also heard that we want to have
14:19 community representatives that may not
14:21 have a professional environmental
14:22 background
14:23 but have shown an interest in the
14:25 environment either through training
14:27 experience or actions and as the board
14:30 will be covering a range of topics
14:32 we want to see a balance in these topics
14:34 represented through the backgrounds and
14:36 interests of individuals on the board
14:38 including around water energy land
14:41 climate
14:42 and others this slide is a list of the
14:46 duties and responsibilities for the
14:48 environmental board which comes directly
14:49 from the proposed amendment
14:51 the first duty is to provide feedback on
14:54 city plans
14:55 regulations and codes impact the natural
14:58 environment
14:58 to ensure alignment with community
15:00 vision including
15:02 but not limited to the shoreline
15:03 management program
15:05 storm and surface water master plan and
15:07 title 18.
15:09 since this is where we envision the bore
15:11 this is where we envision the board
15:12 having teeth
15:13 they'll be working to shape the laws of
15:15 the city that will guide the development
15:18 we'll also encourage board members to do
15:20 their own due diligence and follow
15:21 development projects in the city
15:23 so they can start to understand the code
15:26 they can note issues
15:27 and be prepared to make improvements to
15:29 it they'll ensure protection of our
15:31 environment
15:32 particularly around the updates to title
15:34 18.
15:35 this board will issue board statements
15:37 to track their recommendations
15:38 throughout the approval
15:40 process the recommendations will be
15:42 noted to have substantial weight for the
15:44 decision makers
15:46 directions for these statements will be
15:48 that they should be given
15:50 full and careful consideration in the
15:52 decision-making process
15:54 the next one is to review research and
15:56 best practices to advise on
15:58 environmental policies and ordinances
16:00 for the city
16:01 the board will also develop and maintain
16:03 an environmental checklist
16:05 to be used for projects which will help
16:07 the development commission and others
16:09 evaluate the impact of development on
16:11 the project
16:12 the board will also advise on planning
16:14 and prioritization of actions
16:16 related to climate change and resiliency
16:19 the city just had a community convening
16:21 on climate and this board will be able
16:23 to advise
16:24 and provide input on the recommendations
16:26 that come out of this community effort
16:29 next one is to develop recommendations
16:31 on programs services and priorities
16:34 relating to environmental sustainability
16:36 and protection
16:38 the board will also prepare provide an
16:40 annual report to the mayor and city
16:42 council
16:43 on work plan activities and
16:44 accomplishments including measures of
16:47 success
16:47 related to the board's work we've heard
16:50 comments to include more specific
16:51 language on the measurement and goals
16:53 which will be included in the next
16:54 version
16:56 and last the mayor can direct the board
16:58 to perform other duties as may be
17:00 prescribed in the ordinance
17:04 the next step here is to advise the
17:06 ordinance based on council's input last
17:08 week as well as the input we received
17:09 from ppc tonight
17:11 we will then go back to council and the
17:13 commission's recommend with the
17:15 commission's recommendations for action
17:17 on september 8th
17:18 we'll begin recruitment for the board
17:20 following the council meeting in
17:21 september
17:22 and then interview and select board
17:24 members in the september october time
17:25 frame
17:26 the mayor's appointments will be brought
17:28 to the city council for confirmation in
17:30 late october or early november
17:32 and the first meeting is anticipated to
17:34 be in november
17:36 thank you and i'm happy to take comments
17:39 and questions
17:39 this evening
17:48 i don't see any questions or comm
17:51 i have a question um
17:55 commissioner reinhard has a question
17:59 yes this is commissioner bill reinhardt
18:01 um so
18:03 when we speak about uh climate change
18:07 uh this is this could cover multiple
18:10 committees um is it the
18:13 is the intention to create a new layer
18:16 some sort of approval between the
18:18 existing committees
18:20 um and uh city council
18:23 um how does the new climate change
18:25 committee plan to
18:26 interact with all the existing
18:28 committees to
18:29 provide recommendations
18:31 [Music]
18:34 great question i think that issues
18:37 around climate will be one of the things
18:38 the board so the board will be
18:40 addressing
18:41 and i think some of these issues have
18:43 gone to ppc in the past
18:45 if they were going to be amendments to
18:47 the comprehensive plan
18:48 i think others have gone directly to
18:50 council we've
18:52 heard a desire from the community to
18:54 have some community input before it goes
18:56 through that step
18:57 so this will be an opportunity to do
18:59 that and to be able to do that
19:01 and there's also some items that may be
19:03 of interest to
19:04 both the park board and the
19:06 environmental board so there might be
19:08 joint meetings on some
19:09 items but overall this is an opportunity
19:12 for the community to pri
19:13 to provide input before it goes to
19:15 council
19:15 [Music]
19:18 thank you next question comes from
19:21 commissioner
19:26 thank you uh commissioner joy lou is
19:28 here i appreciate that joan um i'm
19:30 curious if you guys have a work list
19:32 right now you're anticipating
19:34 first meeting in november so ideally you
19:36 would already have created a work list
19:38 for how people are going to get up to
19:40 speed
19:40 on this new board um off the top of my
19:43 head they're going to have to review the
19:44 entire predecessor code
19:46 to really piece this out as it's a brand
19:49 new commission
19:50 trying to look at all aspects of our
19:52 city how we work and giving it's kind of
19:54 new focus
19:55 so that that's a pretty big task right
19:56 there and that's something we can speak
19:58 to since that's something that we
19:59 commonly work with that's just one thing
20:02 so the workload that i see is pretty
20:05 ginormous and i'd like to hear from
20:06 staff
20:07 as to what you guys have compiled for
20:10 getting everybody up to speed and
20:12 basically how you're going to be
20:13 bringing new members who maybe aren't
20:15 familiar with
20:16 getting documents like this and maybe
20:18 new members of the community who haven't
20:19 volunteered before
20:21 you're going to help integrate them and
20:23 get them up to speed to be speaking
20:24 about these topics
20:27 sure thank you yes i think there will be
20:29 definitely an
20:30 orientation period um you know even at
20:32 the first meeting to get everyone up to
20:34 speed with the various rules and
20:35 regulations of all the boards and
20:37 commissions
20:38 and as you noted there's definitely a
20:39 lot of topics that could and will come
20:42 before this board
20:43 um so you know some of the early ones i
20:45 think could be the storm and surface
20:46 water master plan is that
20:48 something that's been in process to be
20:51 updated now
20:52 the city also recently had the climate
20:54 convening so we're going to be
20:56 developing a list of recommendations
20:57 that this board can provide and put on
21:00 so those sorts of items board members
21:02 will be given
21:03 you know in background information and
21:05 staff reports and presentations so they
21:07 can provide
21:09 detailed um or they can provide their
21:11 feedback on it
21:13 for other items you're mentioning about
21:15 such as reviewing title 18
21:17 i think that will have to come in pieces
21:19 that's something that the city has been
21:21 working on for a while and due to covid
21:24 19 it hasn't been
21:26 it was put on hold for a time being but
21:29 as the board will be
21:30 starting to review those i think we will
21:32 want to provide kind of some extra
21:34 technical background as we go into that
21:37 and also asking the board members
21:40 themselves
21:41 who will have interest in these to do
21:42 some of their own due diligence
21:44 but also really wanting to provide the
21:46 information they'll need in order to
21:48 make
21:48 informed recommendations and what do you
21:51 anticipate that time frame looking like
21:54 as far as we've we've done
21:57 we've we've been able to compile all of
21:59 our education our orientation
22:01 we've provided documents and we're able
22:03 to be what you would consider up and
22:05 running the majority of boards are up
22:07 and running after one or two meetings
22:08 effectively
22:10 but this is a whole new board and so
22:12 what is the timetable for getting
22:14 everybody
22:14 ready to be working effectively
22:19 um i think we we are anticipating having
22:21 that first meeting in november
22:23 um something that we talked about with
22:24 the city council was that there are a
22:26 lot of items coming to this board
22:29 so we'll need to we might want to be
22:31 having more than one meeting in the
22:32 first couple months
22:34 so that's something we're going to be
22:35 talking about when we do recruitment for
22:37 this board
22:38 because there will be a lot of topics
22:39 and it does take a little bit more time
22:41 to come up to speed as you're mentioning
22:43 um so we will want to be meeting a
22:45 little bit more frequently
22:46 uh so maybe we would have a three
22:50 or so meetings before the end of the
22:51 year of course we are getting towards
22:53 the end of the year with holiday time in
22:55 december but i would expect the board
22:57 would be up and running
22:58 after the first couple meetings
23:02 um so typically like for instance our
23:04 board most boards tend to meet
23:05 twice a month it was a typical schedule
23:07 it would have obviously if you don't
23:08 have anything on your agenda then you're
23:10 not meeting
23:11 so the typical flow would be that they
23:13 would be meeting
23:14 every other week are you saying that
23:16 you're anticipating that they would be
23:17 reading
23:18 more than that because it sounds like
23:20 when you start talking about the
23:21 holidays and things you're talking about
23:22 the meeting
23:24 you're thinking they're only going to be
23:25 meeting one or two times this year with
23:28 the holidays and with
23:29 orientation so then with more meetings
23:32 to kind of start to get up to speed with
23:34 agenda i'm guessing right now because
23:36 you're i'm looking for more of a hard
23:38 date
23:38 they're going to be up and running ready
23:40 to start working in february
23:42 i mean like when are we actually
23:43 anticipating
23:45 this to be a working operating board
23:48 i think it'll be before then i
23:50 anticipate that happening
23:52 this year um the i would say most boards
23:55 meet once a month but there are several
23:57 that do meet twice a month so
24:00 the the regular schedule for this board
24:02 will be once a month but in the
24:03 beginning
24:04 it will be those first couple meetings
24:06 we do want to get the storm and surface
24:08 water master plan in front of the board
24:10 pretty early so i anticipate that will
24:12 be one of the first items
24:14 after the initial orientation which will
24:16 be the first meeting
24:17 so it might be the second meeting that
24:19 we have that
24:20 or the third i'm not quite sure yet um i
24:23 had one other question that was about
24:25 the environmental board proposal that we
24:27 were given on page 12 of our packet
24:30 is that right now the guiding principle
24:32 of the uh
24:34 of the board creation or again this is
24:37 like a page
24:38 page two of your document page 12 of
24:40 ours would you say that this right now
24:42 is the working body of
24:43 what um the details of the new board
24:47 or would you say that this is evolved
24:48 and this is actually an old copy based
24:50 more on the white paper
24:54 but if it does have the ordinance in it
24:56 which has the
24:58 objective for the board the membership
25:00 and the duties and responsibilities so
25:02 that is what we are proposing now
25:04 um due to some of the comments that we
25:06 heard at the last council meeting as
25:08 well as from the public
25:09 and um what we're looking forward to
25:10 hearing from from this board
25:12 we do anticipate there'll be a few
25:14 changes to that but that is the
25:16 proposal as it stands now thank you
25:28 john you're on mute
25:32 that's trying to be good um i see that
25:35 wally
25:36 is on on this call
25:40 and i know that he made some comments
25:41 about what was going to happen
25:43 in the meantime between now and when the
25:48 new commission is up and running would
25:50 you like to
25:51 um report re restate what you said to
25:55 the
25:55 council yes thank you madam chair
25:58 members of
26:00 the commission appreciate you to having
26:03 me tonight and certainly i
26:04 am available as the evening continues
26:06 for additional questions
26:08 what we want to make sure that we do as
26:10 the board
26:11 getting up to speed is to really work
26:13 with the development commission work
26:15 with community
26:16 planning and development staff to make
26:18 sure that the development commission has
26:20 additional
26:21 details before on environmental review
26:23 of specific projects so
26:25 that is what we plan to do but really
26:27 the biggest fix of all
26:29 is title 18 and what can we do to
26:32 continue to move that forward
26:34 we have committed to the city council
26:36 that the project which has been on pause
26:38 through the pandemic
26:39 that we are going to take off pause
26:40 starting in september
26:42 that is really going to be the fix i
26:44 think community members have come
26:46 to us through these various meetings
26:47 about the environment
26:49 board their biggest concern is how can
26:51 we ensure
26:52 the best environmental review projects i
26:54 think it's mayor paulie's feeling the
26:56 city council's feeling thus far
26:58 uh is that the environment board should
26:59 be really the stewards of sorting
27:01 through
27:02 how best to do that they will also focus
27:04 on the title 18 work title 1810
27:07 which is covers the sustainability
27:09 environmental review
27:10 uh they will focus on that so again
27:13 the purpose of the board is shifting
27:15 from what the rivers and streams group
27:17 did
27:18 uh the teeth that we want to make sure
27:20 this new environment board has
27:22 is to make sure that the policies
27:23 procedures the laws in the city of istap
27:26 that are used by the development
27:27 commission by planning policy
27:29 by city staff are adequate and necessary
27:32 to give appropriate environmental review
27:34 projects moving forward
27:36 so you had mentioned that there were
27:39 four or five
27:42 construction projects that needed to be
27:44 reviewed before
27:47 uh the commission was up and running um
27:50 how are you gonna handle those
27:53 uh my understanding is the number is not
27:55 that large um and i know keith niven is
27:57 on the call
27:58 and perhaps he can speak to it i i think
28:01 we were looking at one or two
28:02 um and we would move forward with that
28:05 uh mr nevin can you confirm that
28:12 uh yes um so
28:15 just thinking about what's in the
28:16 pipeline right now um
28:18 you know the biggest uh project that's
28:21 kind of
28:22 in play is the high school
28:26 and there are a couple wetlands there
28:28 are some critical areas on the high
28:29 school
28:30 as well as it's a very big new building
28:32 as as you know so the
28:34 sustainability piece of it is is part of
28:36 that conversation
28:38 um you know that uh
28:41 the the timeline for reviewing the high
28:44 school
28:44 because the application just came in
28:47 you know it will overlap the creation of
28:50 the board so the board will actually be
28:53 um should be up and running based on
28:55 what megan said earlier
28:57 in time to actually review the high
28:59 school um
29:01 so uh but there's really nothing else
29:04 that comes to mind we have some
29:06 subdivisions right now
29:08 uh there's uh the one that comes to mind
29:10 is tibbetts
29:11 crossing which is right across the sr900
29:15 from the entrance of talus
29:17 and because of kibbits creek there are a
29:20 number of environmentally sensitive
29:22 areas
29:22 but that subdivision went to river and
29:24 streams at the tail end of last year so
29:28 there's really nothing it's a really
29:30 good time to have an interim period
29:32 because there really isn't
29:33 much in the queue that i can think of
29:36 thank you i just that was a question
29:38 that came up in my mind
29:40 so the next question is from
29:44 uh jason voice
29:49 commissioner voice
29:52 thank you madam chair so my question
29:55 just really is how these boards
29:57 specifically the development commission
29:59 and the environmental board will be
30:01 working in tandem with one another
30:03 and again i understand what the
30:05 community is wanting
30:06 if i was to serve on the environmental
30:08 board i would want it to have teeth too
30:10 my guess the only fear that i have is
30:13 these
30:13 boards being in conflict with one
30:16 another in terms of
30:19 projects i mean i i think i heard uh
30:22 miss murphy correctly saying that the
30:23 idea
30:24 of this board is to provide policy and
30:26 recommendations but still allowing the
30:28 development condition
30:30 development commission to take those
30:32 policies and recommendations
30:33 and still allow them to do their work
30:35 without being stepped on by another
30:37 board
30:38 did i hear that correctly
30:41 yes so the way the board is set up now
30:44 is that
30:45 the environmental board would not be
30:46 doing any of the project review that
30:48 would still be going before the
30:50 development commission
30:52 the environmental board would be provide
30:54 would be developing
30:55 a checklist that the development
30:57 commission could use in order to
31:00 determine kind of environmental
31:02 standards for the project so that's
31:03 something we would be asking the
31:04 environmental board to come up with
31:06 but they would not be involved in the
31:07 review itself
31:10 excellent thank you so the next question
31:12 is from
31:14 commissioner bukers
31:24 i'm looking at the
31:28 uh appendix c the package that i
31:30 received which is the summary of
31:32 separate boards and commissions
31:34 and focusing on the river and
31:36 streamsport
31:37 my question to you follows on actually
31:39 from a
31:40 couple of comments on the general tenor
31:43 of the public comments that i received
31:45 anyway
31:46 could you i'm concerned there's a gap
31:50 between what the river and streams board
31:53 did and what the new environmental
31:58 board will do so could you just without
32:00 being too dogmatic
32:02 take the uh descriptions or the
32:05 operations of the rivers and stream
32:07 board
32:08 and kind of patch them over
32:11 to the new um objectives if you will
32:16 responsibilities of the environmental
32:20 board and just for me to be sure that
32:23 there are not gaps i view this entire
32:26 area as one where
32:27 technical expertise is really important
32:30 um and i'm just looking at the
32:33 requirements or
32:34 the skill set requirements for those who
32:37 may be board members
32:39 um we do not was some orientation
32:42 towards professional expertise but i
32:43 didn't even know what that meant
32:45 and so the general question is could you
32:47 kind of map
32:48 rivers ribbon streams onto the new sets
32:51 of objectives and
32:53 just give me a comforter there's not
32:55 gaps
32:56 or if there are gaps then what do you
32:58 plan to do to fill those gaps
33:02 sure i will try my best to answer and
33:04 you can add clarifying questions if you
33:06 have them
33:07 um sorry about that um
33:10 so with the rivers and streams board um
33:14 i think that there will be so several
33:16 things that both boards and commissions
33:17 will
33:18 um would have been reviewing such as the
33:20 storm
33:21 and surface water master plan would be
33:23 one on the shoreline management plan
33:26 title 18 beforehand was going to be
33:28 going before the rivers and streams
33:30 board and that would now be going before
33:32 the environmental board
33:33 so several of those planning documents
33:35 and policies
33:37 related to waterways will be covered by
33:41 both boards
33:43 i think there's several new items that
33:44 would be covered just by the
33:46 environmental board
33:47 those related to climate those related
33:49 to more general sustainability
33:53 recycling and composting activities so
33:55 it opens
33:56 up the the scope of the board quite a
33:59 bit more
34:00 so one of the things that it does not
34:02 have as much is that technical level of
34:05 review so the project review so with the
34:08 rivers and streams board
34:10 we're asking members to be hydrologists
34:13 geologists kind of have that technical
34:15 background as a requirement in order to
34:17 review those projects
34:19 with this new board we do not have that
34:21 so we are opening it up
34:23 to people more interested in the
34:24 environment who want to
34:26 provide input and feedback on these
34:29 types of
34:30 items that would be going before it also
34:32 having two youth members
34:34 um so having them also be voting members
34:36 and being able to provide that feedback
34:38 so i think there's some less technical
34:40 details
34:42 um but there are several items that both
34:44 boards would be
34:45 reviewing right okay then so you
34:49 i just run through for example shoreline
34:51 management enhancing the preservation of
34:53 streams lakes wetlands
34:55 drainage areas etc i know from my own
34:57 experience in the development business
34:59 that that second one uh preservation of
35:02 streams etcetera
35:03 well it's also technical analysis so
35:05 what i've got from you
35:07 please correct me is that those um
35:10 technical aspects that the rivers and
35:13 streams board did
35:14 um some may fall by the wayside
35:18 and you is that correct and if so
35:21 i take it that the the city staff will
35:25 pick
35:25 that technical expertise up or are you
35:28 not
35:28 sure uh i would say that
35:32 since rivers and streams was created the
35:34 city does have a higher level of
35:36 review of those types of projects
35:38 including having it done
35:40 some peer review of those sorts of
35:43 projects
35:44 um i don't know if if mr niven has
35:47 anything to add and as far as the
35:48 details around how the review is
35:50 conducted
35:51 um but there is that technical level of
35:54 review at the staff
35:55 and consultant level so we would not be
35:57 asking that of this board
35:59 specifically uh good evening planning
36:02 commission
36:03 again keith niven director of community
36:05 planning and development so
36:06 to answer the commissioner's questions
36:09 um the city has migrated
36:11 away from using volunteers for
36:14 technical expertise for quite some time
36:18 you know we use consultants wetland
36:20 consultants geotechnical consultants
36:23 shoreline consultants whatever the
36:25 critical area
36:26 is that might be part of a development
36:28 proposal
36:29 if we don't have the technical expertise
36:32 within
36:33 our city department we hire
36:35 professionals to
36:37 provide us with that information what
36:40 river and streams really
36:41 kind of evolved into over the past you
36:44 know few years
36:45 is really more of a community voice on
36:47 environmental issues
36:50 you know the city staff and the
36:51 technical experts that had already
36:53 reviewed the plan against the codes
36:55 that piece of the puzzle is
36:59 is still going to be done it's going to
37:00 be done in the same way uh
37:02 you know after the environmental board
37:04 is created so so there
37:06 really isn't a technical piece that's
37:08 being lost
37:09 um because you know we're basically
37:11 using professional
37:13 uh consultants who are qualified to do
37:16 those reviews
37:17 on behalf of the city so i think it's
37:20 it's um
37:22 i hope that answers your question it
37:25 does
37:26 thank you very much um so i just follow
37:28 up with the second question
37:29 which is totally different i view the
37:31 environmental issues
37:33 as something that crosses borders that's
37:35 not defined by boundaries either isoqua
37:38 sammamish belden whatever
37:39 so is there an express um
37:42 um ambition to have this environmental
37:47 board be
37:48 in some sense reaching out to other
37:50 boards
37:51 in adjacent cities in seattle whatever
37:54 so that some of these issues can be
37:56 dealt with on a more holistic basis
37:59 than just issaquah specific because i
38:02 just don't
38:03 well that's my comment i just don't
38:04 think these kind of issues
38:06 uh recognize boundaries
38:09 yes that's an excellent point um i think
38:11 that that is very true with the
38:13 waterways running through the city
38:14 um it's very true with emissions
38:18 related to climate change so i'd say
38:20 both the
38:21 uh the staff the city staff is involved
38:24 in a lot of different working groups
38:25 across regional boundaries
38:28 whether it's the kokanee working group
38:29 that some staff in
38:31 public works engineering is working on
38:33 i'm involved in the king county city's
38:35 climate collaboration with several of
38:37 the cities in the area
38:39 so i think a lot of the pieces that will
38:41 be becoming
38:42 coming before the board has already been
38:45 through
38:46 some staff work in order to get to the
38:48 place where we where we need
38:49 the community input and a lot of that
38:52 work is
38:53 being done in consultation with other
38:54 cities and and some of these regional
38:56 working groups
38:58 so i think the the power of it is even
39:00 greater because we're able to work
39:02 with so many different other cities on
39:04 the same sorts of issues
39:07 thank you very much
39:22 is someone on mute
39:39 i'm going to come back to him
39:42 and go to the next question to
39:44 commissioner
39:45 carly
39:48 thank you joan this is janice carl um i
39:51 want to go back to one of the issues
39:53 of the transition period
39:56 seems to me from what i understand and
39:59 i'm not an expert on the process but
40:01 that the rivers and stream commission
40:04 has been
40:04 providing some level of project review
40:07 and there's some concern about that
40:10 not being addressed adequately although
40:12 i understand from mr nivin's
40:16 comments that we don't have a lot of
40:17 projects in the queue at the moment but
40:19 at some point that may become timely
40:21 and the critical tool that's going to be
40:23 developed
40:24 is this environmental checklist as i
40:26 understand it
40:28 i wanted to understand where in the
40:30 scope of getting the pro
40:32 the new board the environmental board up
40:34 to speed this particular
40:36 piece of work would be slated in the
40:38 agenda
40:39 as it seems fairly time sensitive
40:44 this is something we've started working
40:47 with community planning and development
40:50 on to start talking about and scoping
40:52 now
40:53 so that it will be something that we can
40:55 present to the board
40:56 um early on i don't have a date yet
40:59 in order to get their feedback so i
41:01 don't think the board will need to
41:02 develop it
41:03 from scratch but it can be something
41:05 that staff is working on now in order to
41:08 bring to the board so we can get it in
41:09 place as soon as possible
41:13 [Music]
41:14 okay thank you
41:18 i need to verify that we have answered
41:20 these questions so is it
41:22 was there another question from
41:24 commissioner
41:25 lewis hi joy lewis here thanks joan i
41:29 did have a question
41:31 if there was a mention before
41:32 commissioner voice mentioned uh you know
41:35 us all wanting this new commission to
41:36 have some teeth to it
41:38 um and i had a question about the
41:41 language that was used i think it
41:43 specifically says
41:44 a substantial weight by the decision
41:46 maker
41:47 which is council and i'm curious what
41:50 board isn't given substantial weight um
41:53 i was a little surprised to see that
41:55 language i've also
41:57 um found it to not have the teeth that i
42:00 think you guys are thinking that it has
42:02 um and it kind of implied to me that
42:04 maybe rivers and streams didn't
42:06 get substantial weight maybe we aren't i
42:08 mean the whole point is that we're
42:09 advising and consent
42:11 uh to giving the best of our ability and
42:14 our opinion to counsel and they are the
42:15 decision makers
42:16 i'm not seeing some teeth and i'm hoping
42:19 you can kind of elaborate
42:20 um and maybe take a little input that
42:22 maybe substantial weight
42:24 uh kind of isn't maybe the the language
42:27 that's ideal for
42:28 for this document yeah so i think
42:32 there's two pieces here
42:33 um on the substantial weight that is
42:36 something we
42:36 had talked about with the community in
42:39 the community conversations that we had
42:41 in june
42:42 with them wanting to make sure that the
42:44 recommendations of the board they did
42:46 feel that the river and stream
42:47 recommendations
42:49 um sometimes they weren't always taken
42:51 so we did want to provide some
42:53 additional thought around that and
42:54 something that i believe it was i
42:56 believe it came from council
42:58 or it might have been the community
43:00 about wanting it to have substantial
43:01 weight specifically so that was a
43:03 request that we wanted to include
43:05 so with that when we have the board's
43:07 recommendations
43:08 we intend to have that as a document
43:11 going
43:12 forward with all these projects and
43:14 there'll be specific directions wanting
43:16 these projects to have full and
43:17 um full consideration i think that
43:20 that's important for
43:22 a lot of the board and the different
43:24 boards do have their
43:26 recommendations that go before other
43:28 areas so i think that could be talked
43:29 about
43:30 in other ways as well but that's
43:32 something we specifically wanted to
43:33 include in the
43:34 development of this board for the teeth
43:37 i think one way that we're thinking
43:38 about this board really having some
43:40 teeth is that in reviewing the
43:43 city's regulations and codes
43:46 specifically with title 18
43:48 those are really the laws that are going
43:49 to be governing development moving
43:51 forward
43:52 so this board is going to have direct
43:53 input and saying what those
43:55 are so that's where we're seeing this
43:56 board have those teeth
43:59 i would recommend changing the language
44:01 right now to me
44:02 it doesn't mean uh what i think you mean
44:05 think that saying that it has
44:07 substantial weight um
44:09 are we creating a tier system where each
44:10 board and commission has
44:12 a different amount of points that are
44:14 given i mean there's there's
44:15 the whole point is to suggest a
44:18 weightiness to it and in fact it does
44:20 the opposite it feels
44:21 very hollow to me and i would suggest
44:23 that we've gotten this feedback i think
44:25 all of us
44:26 want to see this commission this new
44:29 board
44:30 succeed and so finding another way to
44:33 say what is this accountability
44:35 is there is there a checklist that we're
44:38 going to put
44:38 to staff and say hey have you met these
44:40 expectations by the community
44:43 i think there's a lot of different ways
44:44 to say are we succeeding
44:47 and is this board being heard but just
44:50 putting in that language to me doesn't
44:52 uh doesn't necessarily feel like teeth
44:54 and
44:54 it doesn't sound like there's um there's
44:57 more language coming um to suggest that
45:00 they have some sort of quasi-judicial
45:03 backing behind them and so um i find
45:06 this language to uh
45:08 have uh i have issue with it i guess i
45:10 should leave it at that
45:16 so we're gonna go back to the question
45:18 from commissioner fowle
45:20 i think um city administrator bob kuetz
45:23 wrote in the
45:24 comments i believe he wanted to have a
45:25 comment on the substantial week oh i
45:27 didn't see that
45:29 city administrator opkowitz
45:35 yes thank you madam chair and uh i am
45:38 new to your group and i appreciate your
45:40 indulgence
45:40 to let me pop in uh with comments as
45:43 appropriate
45:44 uh we uh went actually to the isla city
45:47 attorney jim haney
45:48 uh with this discussion about the uh uh
45:52 of teeth we keep referring to that and
45:54 that that is
45:55 something that has come from the
45:56 community uh and we asked
45:58 the city attorney what can we do to add
46:00 to this ordinance
46:02 uh to help with that and he shared with
46:04 us uh
46:05 language that appears in other municipal
46:07 codes uh throughout washington state
46:10 where where this uh is a term of art and
46:13 so we
46:14 included the substantial weight at his
46:16 recommendation
46:17 to make it very clear legislatively in
46:20 the
46:20 issaquah municipal code that
46:23 the words from this board or commission
46:26 has way
46:27 again the boards the commissions we have
46:28 in this law are all very different
46:30 uh the development commission ppc um
46:33 have weight that's given to it by the
46:35 code and in some cases by state law
46:38 uh the rest of our boards and
46:39 commissions do not have that they are
46:41 strictly and simply advisory
46:43 and so this issue of substantial weight
46:46 has
46:46 a standing in uh state of washington law
46:49 and so we added it this way
46:51 again i think it's important to view
46:53 this as a different approach
46:56 for 25 years the rivers and streams
46:58 group
46:59 was doing staff work they were basically
47:01 doing a staff
47:02 review of projects and mayor paulie has
47:05 come before the issaquah council and
47:07 said i want
47:08 a consideration of a different approach
47:10 and that different approach
47:11 is to have this environment board weigh
47:14 on the laws the local laws that have to
47:17 be followed by staff
47:19 by ppc by the development commission by
47:21 the hearing officer
47:22 depending on the project so that is the
47:24 fundamental change
47:26 of you know there are certainly
47:27 community members who disagree with it
47:29 who want
47:30 a citizen review of every project the
47:32 reality is rivers and streams was not
47:34 citizen review of every project so this
47:36 version streams
47:38 had a limited review for
47:41 projects but that that is the proposal
47:44 the table is to change that so again the
47:47 language
47:48 of substantial uh comes from law in
47:51 other
47:52 communities in washington state and
47:53 that's the reason it's there
47:55 thank you to the administrator that is a
47:58 very good explanation
48:01 so with that we will go back to
48:03 commissioner fall
48:06 all right thanks madam uh chair so
48:09 two questions here uh first one i think
48:11 was already addressed by
48:12 keith two people from the public uh ann
48:16 fletcher
48:16 and dave kepler commented
48:20 on a substantial time gap it sounds like
48:23 based on what keith had mentioned that
48:25 there really will not be
48:27 a a gap so much because there really
48:30 won't be anything to discuss
48:33 between the time between now
48:36 and um when the
48:39 board will be launched
48:42 um so if you could just recap that and
48:44 then my next question
48:46 is uh let's see
48:49 to wally here
48:53 how would the
48:58 uh environmental board be different than
49:01 the development commission
49:02 and the ppc in terms of
49:05 its structure will they be doing
49:07 hearings or are they only
49:09 going to be discussing key topics
49:14 thanks
49:18 uh so commissioner fall um
49:21 to recap uh this is keith niven again
49:24 director of community planning and
49:25 development
49:26 sorry um to recap i don't i don't really
49:30 envision there being a gap
49:31 i think what you've heard you know so
49:34 part of it is going to depend on what
49:36 ultimately the council adopts
49:37 what's being recommended is that
49:40 the work that was happening at river and
49:43 streams be immediately shifted to
49:46 development commission
49:47 and i think that's incumbent upon the
49:50 staff if that is the outcome
49:52 to help educate the development
49:54 commission help them understand their
49:56 expanded role
49:57 and how we are going to present
49:59 information to them in a way that
50:01 is beyond what they've been getting in
50:03 the past so
50:05 so if if if the ordinance lands the way
50:07 that it's being recommended now
50:09 that would be my answer if ultimately
50:11 there's a decision for some project
50:13 review to go to the environmental board
50:16 what i said earlier still applies that i
50:20 don't think there is much in the
50:22 pipeline right now
50:23 they would potentially need to be
50:25 reviewed say in the next
50:27 uh six months uh which is kind of this
50:31 time
50:31 we're talking about um sunsetting driven
50:34 streams and starting up the
50:35 environmental board so
50:37 i think either way this plays out i
50:39 don't see there being a problem
50:44 and christopher paul if i can address
50:46 the the second part of the question
50:48 uh i i don't think it's envisioned that
50:51 the environment board
50:52 is holding hearings on projects might
50:55 the environment board have public
50:57 meetings
50:57 uh specifically on larger issues namely
51:00 title 18.
51:02 as we're looking at title 18 there's a
51:03 lot of interest in the environmental
51:06 language within title 18 uh i absolutely
51:08 see that the environment board might
51:10 have some sort of community meeting
51:12 uh specifically on that inviting people
51:14 uh to comment
51:16 um i think it'd be those kinds of
51:17 meetings on plans as
51:19 megan has talked about the uh there's
51:22 there's still a lot of
51:23 of other larger city plans that will
51:26 need to be reviewed so there may be
51:28 public meetings
51:29 specifically devoted to those plans but
51:31 they're not going to be formal hearings
51:33 uh in the way that other land-use bodies
51:36 within the city have
51:41 thank you so was there an additional
51:44 question
51:45 from commissioner reinhard
51:49 uh yeah this is commissioner reinhardt
51:51 so more of a statement than a question
51:54 um i i applaud the city's move towards
51:57 um the the creationist board i think
51:59 it's a long time coming
52:01 um along the lines of adding teeth and
52:05 adding weight to this board
52:07 i would really encourage you megan and
52:09 city staff
52:10 to attempt to get scientists and
52:14 specialists on the board
52:15 as much as you can especially when it
52:18 comes to like climate change which i'm
52:19 assuming is going to be the kind of the
52:21 biggest
52:22 uh piece of the environment or board
52:25 there's a lot of science and a lot of
52:26 data that backs that
52:27 up and so we're really at we're at a
52:29 crucial time here where
52:32 right out of the gate i think it will do
52:33 you well to make sure that we have
52:36 um folks that are that know the science
52:39 understand the data to move this along
52:43 and give it weight right out of the gate
52:45 that's the only statement i have
52:49 does commissioner voice have an
52:51 additional comment
52:53 yeah just to commission her voice here
52:56 and just to piggyback off commissioner
52:58 reinhardt
52:59 is that i also agree it would be good
53:01 for staff and
53:03 the community to have people who are
53:04 actually
53:06 specialists in this field what my
53:09 concern i guess is
53:10 is ideologues getting onto this board
53:13 and
53:14 stifling progress for ideological
53:17 reasons
53:18 so again i do think it would be good
53:19 that actual people who know the science
53:21 because it is a legitimate problem
53:23 but i'd hate to also see wonderful
53:25 projects diminished
53:27 simply because certain people have
53:30 a somewhat warped view of
53:33 environmentalism
53:34 so again i'm just going to piggyback on
53:36 that comment in the sense that again i
53:38 do think it's good to have
53:39 people with that background on that
53:42 board
53:43 it kind of concerns me even though i
53:44 understand what you guys are trying to
53:45 do with the youth
53:47 at 15 i don't really know how much you
53:49 can offer
53:50 to an environmental board other than
53:53 espousing things you might have heard on
53:55 the news
53:56 or your favorite blog
54:03 so there's a comment or question from
54:06 commissioner buechers
54:14 and i'd like to add to my
54:18 question my initial question to megan
54:21 and side comment
54:22 concern about professional expertise and
54:25 not understanding what that meant
54:27 to reinforce what mr voice just said and
54:29 commissioner wenger
54:31 that um more perhaps that we can
54:34 more precise wording or at least an
54:37 understanding
54:39 emphasis on on patent flex where teams
54:41 be introduced into the
54:43 uh selection of the uh the board members
54:46 secondly a question um i view this as a
54:49 work in progress
54:50 and no matter how many discussions we
54:52 have now things will change with this
54:54 board
54:55 as time goes on we'll find out what
54:56 works and what doesn't so
54:58 in developing or presenting or accepting
55:01 arguments like this
55:03 are there legal impediments to making
55:05 changes as we go
55:07 forward or is it not easy to say okay
55:09 this was the initial idea
55:11 um this doesn't quite work you want to
55:14 change the responsibilities
55:16 etc etc how easy is that to do within
55:18 the the context of our discussion here
55:22 thank you all right thank you
55:26 um i think that it would be similar to
55:28 the process that we're going through
55:30 today i imagine that would be a
55:31 conversation
55:33 with the board about it and then if
55:34 there was a need to have
55:36 a change in duties then that would be a
55:38 change to the code
55:39 um so it would be something that both uh
55:42 ppc
55:43 and council would need to review and
55:45 approve in order for that to go
55:46 forward and also to comment on the
55:50 professional expertise i appreciate
55:52 those comments in the ordinance we do
55:54 try details several of those different
55:57 backgrounds that we do want on the board
55:59 scientists engineers
56:01 so we definitely do want that level of
56:03 expertise on the board
56:05 we do have the two youth positions which
56:07 i think will bring
56:08 a lot of good value to those
56:09 conversations and have different
56:11 perspective and background
56:13 um and then we did want to have a few
56:14 positions that are also open to
56:16 community members who
56:17 may have less expertise but are really
56:20 interested in the issue because as we've
56:22 heard at the
56:22 a lot of the community meetings there's
56:24 a lot of interest and engagement in the
56:25 board
56:26 so i'm hoping to have a really
56:27 well-rounded
56:29 group of people with both those more
56:31 technical expertise and
56:33 more interest thank you regarding the
56:36 first question then do you see a time
56:38 period during which or after which
56:40 you would want to review the
56:43 success that you will with operation of
56:45 the environment lord
56:47 and put forward um uh any
56:50 proposals for review or would that be uh
56:52 how how would
56:53 any proposed changes um work
56:56 who would initiate uh
56:59 comments or questions about what second
57:01 here was what we initially thought would
57:03 work
57:04 and now this isn't quite working this
57:06 way we'd like to make a change
57:07 how does that change how does that
57:10 happen
57:11 who needs the change assuming there
57:14 might be and maybe everything's perfect
57:16 that we're discussing i don't know
57:17 but my point is we don't know
57:21 but commissioner let me take its wallet
57:23 with the city administrator let me take
57:26 a a a crack at that uh you know the city
57:28 council and its discussions on this
57:30 change
57:31 have been very interested in a
57:33 measurement
57:34 of what success or not success this
57:36 board is having
57:37 and so we are looking at the regular
57:40 reporting
57:41 back to the city council and to mayor
57:42 paulie you know mayor paulie uh when she
57:44 hired me to be the city administrator
57:46 now almost a year ago
57:47 this was really the one the top of her
57:49 list the frustration
57:50 uh that she felt uh on the development
57:52 commission or the frustration of many
57:54 community members
57:55 that we really weren't doing this right
57:57 so so this is something that she's very
57:59 keen on
58:00 uh the city council as a whole is very
58:01 keen on so i suspect there's gonna be a
58:03 lot of discussion
58:04 and so the direct answer to your
58:06 question is i think the city council
58:08 will be the ones that would uh initiate
58:10 any changes
58:11 based on the feedback that they're
58:12 getting from the community that they're
58:14 getting from other development partners
58:16 not only ppc but the development
58:17 commission
58:19 other folks that are very keenly
58:21 involved in this fight the city council
58:23 and mayor paulie will take the lead on
58:24 any changes
58:26 thank you are there any other questions
58:30 from the commissioners
58:35 i know that uh during this discussion
58:38 there were several suggestions that came
58:40 up so i'm hoping that
58:42 um our secretary
58:45 has uh um put them all
58:48 into the uh minutes and that
58:52 those particular comments will
58:54 eventually be presented to city council
58:57 uh on the eighth so that uh they
59:00 whether we adopt or we recommend this to
59:03 go forward or not
59:04 i think those comments should be
59:06 incorporated into
59:08 uh the city council meeting on the 8th
59:12 if i'm hearing no questions from the
59:14 commissioners i'm going to
59:16 open the public hearing at 7 32
59:20 before we actually start calling the
59:24 anybody who's signed up or would like to
59:26 speak
59:27 i just like to make a comment that
59:31 i appreciate commissioner files bringing
59:35 up the
59:36 um that we have received written
59:39 comments and
59:40 normally we don't make a
59:43 attempt to discuss them we just say that
59:46 we read them and sometimes we
59:48 incorporate them into our
59:50 discussion and sometimes we don't so
59:52 from now on i would like to be able to
59:54 say
59:55 if we get a written question
59:58 written uh ideas before the meeting that
1:00:01 we have
1:00:02 uh one of the commissioners uh
1:00:06 update us on what exactly has gone
1:00:08 through on those
1:00:10 on those uh opinions that were submitted
1:00:14 so i know the city council does that and
1:00:16 i really appreciate
1:00:18 the fact that they are so concerned with
1:00:20 their citizens and their interests that
1:00:23 we should be doing the same thing so
1:00:24 from now on i would like to
1:00:27 be able to do that and i was going to do
1:00:30 that now but
1:00:31 i see that i have received three
1:00:37 three comments and two of the people
1:00:40 have made the comment i think are on uh
1:00:45 are planning to make a public comment
1:00:47 tonight so i'm not going to go into them
1:00:49 unless they
1:00:50 do not cover the issues that were
1:00:53 brought up
1:00:53 so um i assume doug is going to be
1:00:57 the one to
1:01:02 tell us who's on the uh
1:01:07 on the uh who wanted to make public
1:01:09 comment but i do want to
1:01:11 remind them that um to unreach your
1:01:14 microphone
1:01:15 star six if it's on your phone
1:01:19 state your name address relationship
1:01:21 ship to the city
1:01:22 speak clearly and pause frequently limit
1:01:25 your comments to five minutes and then
1:01:27 remute your microphone when done
1:01:30 if you do not respond after your name or
1:01:32 phone number is called
1:01:34 or your connection is lost the meeting
1:01:37 need to proceed so we encourage you to
1:01:40 uh try to fix the connection and come
1:01:43 back to us
1:01:44 and for those who have joined us tonight
1:01:47 and would like to speak but did not
1:01:49 sign up in advance please press star 3
1:01:52 on your phone
1:01:53 we will call the first six digits of
1:01:56 your phone number when it is your turn
1:01:57 to make comments
1:01:59 so uh with that is has anybody
1:02:02 signed up to speak
1:02:06 thank you for that yes we had two
1:02:08 residents sign up to speak
1:02:09 and the first person up uh to speak is
1:02:13 connie marsh
1:02:17 hi i'm connie carson i live up on squawk
1:02:21 mountain
1:02:24 and uh so i'm a little chagrined by the
1:02:28 conversation
1:02:29 that is being had as most of you know
1:02:32 i've spent years and years of my life
1:02:35 working to protect the environment in
1:02:38 the city
1:02:38 and so i'm going to tell you a couple of
1:02:41 things that i
1:02:42 think aren't
1:02:45 understood river and streams board
1:02:48 did not just do development projects
1:02:52 they did uh road
1:02:55 projects that impacted the environment
1:02:58 they did parks
1:02:59 projects that impacted the environment
1:03:02 and they also did public works projects
1:03:06 impacted the environment basically
1:03:08 anything
1:03:09 dealing with the animals
1:03:12 and the water itself and the habitats
1:03:17 was the basis for the river and streams
1:03:20 board
1:03:21 so when uh the conversation
1:03:26 goes to mr niven and he says well we
1:03:30 only have one project
1:03:31 right now there is a roads project
1:03:35 happening along a stream and wetland on
1:03:38 the sr 900 that no one
1:03:41 is reviewing because it's on no one's
1:03:43 radar
1:03:44 no one can see it and this would have
1:03:46 been a project that would have gone to
1:03:47 river and streams board
1:03:49 because it needs a new sepa decision
1:03:52 because
1:03:52 changes have happened and what the river
1:03:55 and streams board
1:03:56 did is it helped staff
1:03:59 to get more for the environment because
1:04:03 as developers talk to the city
1:04:06 over and over and over again they want
1:04:09 they want they want but the community
1:04:11 value is
1:04:11 environmental protection and the river
1:04:14 and streams board
1:04:15 out of the balance where the city could
1:04:17 actually
1:04:18 ask for more and try to
1:04:21 preserve and maintain some of the
1:04:23 glorious nature that we have in our town
1:04:26 so our current code is ancient
1:04:29 and really horrifying and there's a lot
1:04:32 judgment calls that are made and without
1:04:36 any counter balance for these decisions
1:04:39 we are going to have an eroding
1:04:40 environment
1:04:41 during the time period that we have
1:04:44 before
1:04:45 we get a new and better code
1:04:48 so while you talk about there's only one
1:04:52 project there may be only one
1:04:54 large development project that goes to
1:04:57 development
1:04:57 commission now remember development
1:05:00 commission does not get single family
1:05:02 houses that are on the lake or on the
1:05:04 stream
1:05:05 they don't get park projects that say
1:05:07 might
1:05:08 be building a project along issaquah
1:05:12 creek and so i fail to see
1:05:16 how we are getting the same
1:05:18 environmental
1:05:19 protection that we had with river and
1:05:22 streams board
1:05:23 as bad voice so i vehemently disagree
1:05:27 with what you're discussing
1:05:30 for the interim i don't think i have a
1:05:32 problem long term
1:05:33 but just until we get code
1:05:37 and development commission is not going
1:05:40 to be looking at any of that
1:05:42 so who is right
1:05:45 and then when it comes to making a
1:05:47 decision tonight what i saw
1:05:49 is they're asking you to have a public
1:05:52 hearing
1:05:53 and push forward something that is
1:05:55 unformed
1:05:56 and that would be like saying well you
1:05:58 know we want to do the comprehensive
1:06:00 plan but we are actually going to
1:06:02 put the language in later so we want you
1:06:04 to approve this
1:06:06 even though we know the language is
1:06:07 going to change and you may not agree
1:06:10 with that language
1:06:11 but we're going to push that language
1:06:13 that we wrote without community review
1:06:17 to council and i don't think that's
1:06:19 appropriate i think that is the
1:06:21 opposite of giving the planning policy
1:06:24 commission the due
1:06:25 weight that they deserve i think that is
1:06:27 the opposite
1:06:28 of getting the community engaged
1:06:32 in decision making this is going to be
1:06:34 christmas time right there is no harm in
1:06:37 taking
1:06:37 this and getting the new language that
1:06:40 they expect to put in this ordinance and
1:06:42 coming back to you with the
1:06:44 actual language not that well but this
1:06:46 and this and this
1:06:47 are going to change so ann fletcher
1:06:51 wrote a great letter and i hope that you
1:06:54 listen and try to incorporate some of
1:06:57 information into any motion
1:07:00 that you put on the floor but really
1:07:03 what i want you to do
1:07:05 is i want to to say you know what we
1:07:07 need to see the actual language so that
1:07:10 we understand
1:07:11 what you are really presenting because
1:07:13 we're only getting
1:07:14 half of what you're saying
1:07:17 thank you very much
1:07:21 is there anybody else signed up to speak
1:07:26 yes ann fletcher is next
1:07:36 can you hear me yes can you can you hear
1:07:40 yes we can okay thank you i'm sorry
1:07:44 i i didn't do star the star and um i
1:07:47 wanted to make sure you could hear me
1:07:49 thank you
1:07:50 um so i am ann fletcher and i i live in
1:07:53 old town of issaquah i'm a resident here
1:07:57 and a leader for people for climate
1:07:59 action
1:08:00 i just want to thank you for this
1:08:02 opportunity and
1:08:04 from my own experience on other
1:08:06 organizations with policy-based
1:08:07 government
1:08:08 governance i really appreciate what
1:08:10 you're doing and i appreciate the time
1:08:12 that you took to look at everything and
1:08:13 the questions that you asked tonight
1:08:15 because i learned a lot
1:08:17 um the community really is excited about
1:08:20 the establishment of this new board
1:08:22 and it wants it to succeed um and
1:08:26 so i i have followed and participated on
1:08:29 a lot in the public hearings and the
1:08:30 council meetings and
1:08:32 talked with uh each city council member
1:08:34 and the mayor and
1:08:35 uh community members um about what is
1:08:39 really essential
1:08:40 in this proposal to ensure that this
1:08:42 board is an effective
1:08:44 part of the city structures and codes
1:08:47 and towards environmental stewardship
1:08:50 this has been a bit of a challenge
1:08:52 because um the meetings have come up
1:08:54 pretty quickly
1:08:55 and so in yeah the the document
1:08:58 is evolving and so i didn't really know
1:09:01 i was going to be commenting on until i
1:09:03 heard
1:09:05 megan presenting tonight except i had
1:09:07 the written and then there were some
1:09:08 comments to change
1:09:09 you know the written and so it's very
1:09:12 challenging to comment on something that
1:09:14 is evolving
1:09:15 um which perhaps you've discovered
1:09:17 yourself tonight
1:09:19 but based on what i know now um
1:09:22 i i had a couple of issues that i wanted
1:09:26 to bring up that
1:09:27 to for you to consider um
1:09:30 that need need to be added i think and
1:09:32 changed before this goes to the council
1:09:36 the land use code requirements which
1:09:38 protect the environment
1:09:41 are being removed by dissolving the
1:09:43 rivers and streams board and i won't go
1:09:45 into the same thing connie
1:09:47 said but these code review requirements
1:09:51 should be more
1:09:52 clearly assigned to other
1:09:55 boards or commissions or whatever the
1:09:57 plan is
1:09:59 for example there are things in the code
1:10:01 that talk about the rivers and streams
1:10:03 board doing the critical area studies
1:10:08 and reviewing them
1:10:10 and grading and filling and
1:10:14 being able to hold hearings which i'm
1:10:16 now heard for the first time tonight
1:10:18 this board might be able to hold a
1:10:20 hearing um
1:10:22 and even environmental impact statements
1:10:24 that is in
1:10:25 code and those would all be removed
1:10:29 and they are things that i have not seen
1:10:31 an answer to who would do
1:10:32 all those so the community needs
1:10:36 additional information about how
1:10:38 environmental review of projects will be
1:10:41 effectively implemented
1:10:42 um for example how many uh
1:10:46 projects um there are many
1:10:49 projects that the development commission
1:10:50 does not review as connie alluded to
1:10:53 how do they get a solid inter in in
1:10:56 environmental review
1:10:57 um especially um we need we need some
1:11:00 sort of a plan
1:11:02 probably for a year to me the gap is not
1:11:05 a few months it's a year
1:11:06 until the title 18 land use code is
1:11:09 revised
1:11:10 and it's it's a pretty long gap um so
1:11:13 that's the first point my second point
1:11:15 is that the review duties of the
1:11:17 environmental board
1:11:18 um the things that they're going to be
1:11:20 reviewing should be added
1:11:22 to the applicable land use code
1:11:24 processes the level five and six review
1:11:28 uh which have flow charts that uh just
1:11:30 that describe them or illustrate them
1:11:34 i think this needs to be done before the
1:11:36 proposed ordinance goes to the city
1:11:38 council because
1:11:40 things are being taken out of the code
1:11:42 from rivers and streams and i think
1:11:44 things need to be put
1:11:45 into the code not just the ordinance
1:11:48 establishing
1:11:49 the board but what is how is it going to
1:11:52 fit in and i heard questions from
1:11:54 from you all how is it going to fit in
1:11:55 with the other related boards
1:11:58 and how's that going to work point
1:12:00 number three
1:12:01 is that the environmental checklist for
1:12:03 development projects should apply to
1:12:05 all projects public and private
1:12:08 regardless of size
1:12:10 and this tool is really important
1:12:14 and i think besides helping to develop
1:12:17 and maintain the checklist the
1:12:19 environmental board
1:12:20 should provide recommendations on its
1:12:23 implementation
1:12:24 so that it can track and evaluate
1:12:28 that the checklist effectiveness as a
1:12:30 screening tool
1:12:32 and that should be written right in
1:12:34 there so that that it's very clear
1:12:37 my fourth point um i don't really have
1:12:40 to make
1:12:40 if if megan um and is is
1:12:44 going to be adding in
1:12:48 some language to the objective that the
1:12:51 objective should be to protect the
1:12:52 environment
1:12:53 and address climate change as opposed to
1:12:57 just advising the board on it and that
1:12:59 the annual report would have measurable
1:13:02 goals to
1:13:03 measure that i don't i don't have to i
1:13:06 don't think i have to talk about that
1:13:08 and i believe that's going to be done
1:13:09 and that's wonderful um
1:13:12 the language suggestions are in my
1:13:13 written comment and
1:13:15 so um my my my conclusion
1:13:18 is is that um the when a new
1:13:21 environmental board was proposed by the
1:13:23 city it was framed as being an update
1:13:25 and an
1:13:25 expansion of the rivers and streams
1:13:27 board and i don't think this has yet
1:13:29 fully happened
1:13:31 i agree nothing is ever perfect
1:13:34 you know it's always in process but i re
1:13:36 i don't think this is ready
1:13:37 um the it doesn't address uh the several
1:13:41 important um
1:13:42 rivers and streams reviews uh that i
1:13:44 mentioned
1:13:45 it doesn't reference or explain how many
1:13:48 of the projects that are not reviewed by
1:13:50 the development commission
1:13:52 will get a good environmental review um
1:13:54 and it doesn't
1:13:55 state where in the the land use
1:13:58 code requirements this board
1:14:02 review falls and where it fits into the
1:14:05 system
1:14:07 so i would recommend i would ask that
1:14:11 that that further revisions be made to
1:14:13 the proposal
1:14:15 and come back and then go to the city
1:14:17 council for final approval
1:14:19 thank you very much thank you
1:14:23 i'm glad that you came to speak because
1:14:26 i was going to go through each one of
1:14:29 bullet points in your
1:14:33 in your letter and i think you did it
1:14:35 much better than me
1:14:36 me just reading off of your uh
1:14:39 off of your form is anybody else signed
1:14:42 up to
1:14:43 to speak nobody else is signed up to
1:14:46 speak
1:14:48 is there anybody that is on the phone
1:14:51 that would like to speak
1:14:53 that has not signed up
1:14:57 i do not see uh any phoning callers
1:15:01 besides connie and ann
1:15:07 okay hearing none is there any objection
1:15:10 to closing the public meeting
1:15:16 hearing none the public meeting is
1:15:17 closed at 7
1:15:19 48 and i would open it up to
1:15:22 further discussion from the
1:15:23 commissioners
1:15:25 before we if we decide to make a motion
1:15:29 one way or the other
1:15:49 [Music]
1:15:50 um i don't know where we stopped
1:15:54 so um is there a
1:15:57 comment from commissioner boss
1:16:01 a voice
1:16:07 yeah you stopped you you stopped one too
1:16:09 early but that's okay i'll make a
1:16:10 comment regardless
1:16:12 um i do believe that uh both these
1:16:15 ladies made
1:16:16 excellent points um i am fuzzy here so i
1:16:20 myself am looking for more clarification
1:16:22 on a couple areas again i don't really
1:16:24 understand how these boards overlap
1:16:26 because it hasn't
1:16:27 been presented uh there's a lot of
1:16:29 there's a wonderful outline for a new
1:16:31 board
1:16:33 and i believe this will be a great board
1:16:35 a great addition to the city
1:16:37 uh but i i'm starting to feel that again
1:16:39 i i there's some clarification that i
1:16:41 need too
1:16:42 and i don't know if again i read through
1:16:45 the literature
1:16:45 and i still have some of those same
1:16:47 concerns even the couple
1:16:49 even if i'm not completely uh sharing
1:16:51 all of the concerns of miss marsh
1:16:53 or miss fletcher but again there are a
1:16:55 few things that i'm looking for
1:16:57 clarification for too
1:16:58 so thank you is there a question from
1:17:02 commissioner lewis
1:17:06 thank you joan uh commissioner lewis
1:17:08 here um
1:17:09 i want to thank our community
1:17:12 participants so far tonight uh for their
1:17:14 comments also ahead of our meeting
1:17:16 and here tonight um i actually have
1:17:19 this many comments i don't know if you
1:17:21 guys can see that i wrote
1:17:22 on this document um and i'm curious to
1:17:25 see how everybody's feeling because
1:17:27 i could talk about this for an hour i
1:17:29 went through point by point
1:17:30 um for the proposal i could talk about
1:17:33 all eight we could each go through
1:17:34 and talk about each one if we want to
1:17:36 talk about how we want to refine this
1:17:38 how we want to
1:17:39 send this to council but i have a lot of
1:17:42 concerns about this i
1:17:43 i privately as a citizen contacted megan
1:17:46 when i first heard about this
1:17:47 and was already up to date on what the
1:17:49 work sessions that were going on in the
1:17:51 community because we work closely with
1:17:52 reverends and streams
1:17:54 it's not uncommon for us to get
1:17:55 something very weighty and to say
1:17:58 has rivers and streams seen this and
1:17:59 it's a checkpoint for us to say
1:18:01 we don't need to do a deep dive because
1:18:03 we know other people have
1:18:05 so i think that what's happening here is
1:18:08 that we have
1:18:09 two separate needs within our community
1:18:12 i don't appreciate the way that they've
1:18:14 been rolled up
1:18:15 maybe they could be rolled up in a way
1:18:16 that makes sense as i'm seeing it
1:18:19 it doesn't what i see is that rivers and
1:18:22 streams needs to be updated
1:18:24 how it was originally created and how
1:18:26 it's working now has changed
1:18:28 that makes a lot of sense to say um
1:18:31 the to say then that that should be
1:18:34 rolled up
1:18:34 into a very highly needed board about
1:18:37 climate change
1:18:38 um i don't know that i see that
1:18:40 correlation because what i see
1:18:42 is right now the city coming to us and
1:18:44 saying let's drop rivers and streams
1:18:47 let's take out language without
1:18:49 replacing it
1:18:50 and let's create a board that really is
1:18:52 going to be pretty high level and it's
1:18:54 going to have
1:18:55 a lot on its plate um and i'm not seeing
1:18:58 a crossover right now
1:18:59 as it's presented so in my view
1:19:03 we can either go through this for much
1:19:05 longer
1:19:06 um if everybody wants to keep having a
1:19:07 discussion and submitting
1:19:09 the city um to city staff um how we want
1:19:12 to keep tweaking this or i'm curious to
1:19:14 see from my fellow commissioners too if
1:19:16 you're saying
1:19:17 actually we have a halt right here um
1:19:20 and we don't know that we'll be moving
1:19:22 forward um because i know we have other
1:19:24 things on our agenda tonight
1:19:25 i'm happy to keep going on questions i'm
1:19:28 happy to keep going on suggestions
1:19:29 but what i see from my standpoint right
1:19:31 now is that there's an overarching
1:19:34 environmental work that needs to happen
1:19:36 as far as how climate change affects our
1:19:38 city which happens in literally
1:19:40 every sector that we have um it's a big
1:19:42 task it's a big chunk
1:19:44 it's definitely overdue but that doesn't
1:19:47 mean that it should be all-encompassing
1:19:48 to now say that
1:19:50 um very large concepts
1:19:53 like for instance are salmon run to say
1:19:56 that that now
1:19:57 falls to this climate change commission
1:19:59 to me feels like we're lacking a big
1:20:02 piece and we're going to be giving
1:20:03 something up without actually defining
1:20:05 where it's going to be going
1:20:06 um before i want to hear from everybody
1:20:08 else i do want to mention that there's a
1:20:10 huge gap right now in this document
1:20:12 because there's no mention of
1:20:13 environmental security which is
1:20:15 something that i think is very important
1:20:16 when we talk about climate
1:20:18 change um a good example of that
1:20:21 is the um is the plume of pfoas that we
1:20:25 in our groundwater right now that's
1:20:26 something that needs to be examined and
1:20:28 it needs to be
1:20:29 constantly talked about it isn't um
1:20:32 one a good example is also this pandemic
1:20:35 um it
1:20:36 the the idea that environmental
1:20:37 disasters how they
1:20:39 impact the way that we do business um is
1:20:42 something that we should have a much
1:20:43 broader plan for right now and it's
1:20:45 something
1:20:46 that is closely tied to climate change
1:20:49 so without any kind of mention right now
1:20:52 of environmental security
1:20:54 i think that we're missing a huge part
1:20:56 of why we
1:20:57 are why we need to study climate change
1:20:59 and its effect on all these sectors
1:21:01 in our community um and it hasn't even
1:21:04 been brought up in the document which i
1:21:06 really lacking um so again i'm really
1:21:09 curious to hear from my other
1:21:10 commissioners how much you guys want to
1:21:12 tease this out tonight because
1:21:14 i have significant issues with the eight
1:21:17 um proposals that are right now in the
1:21:19 ordinance
1:21:22 so i have a question from commissioner
1:21:30 yep thanks madam chair so i have two
1:21:33 questions and two
1:21:34 one of them plays right into uh joy's
1:21:37 point
1:21:40 one have we had um river and streams
1:21:44 input
1:21:44 on the organization of this proposal and
1:21:48 do we really need to dissolve them at
1:21:50 this point or can we actually
1:21:52 run them continuously or in parallel as
1:21:56 environmental board is developed
1:22:00 because it sounds like there's maybe to
1:22:03 keith's point maybe not necessarily
1:22:05 what he thinks is a gap but we feel
1:22:07 there might be a gap so
1:22:09 until they get ramped up and discuss
1:22:11 some of the issues and help with the
1:22:12 formation of the board
1:22:14 thank you so city administrator of
1:22:17 afghanistan
1:22:18 yes thank you very much um
1:22:22 we have no uh quorum of river and
1:22:24 streams board we have not had a quorum
1:22:26 um um for a number of months
1:22:30 and mr niven can help me with the exact
1:22:32 number
1:22:33 so one of the challenges in looking at
1:22:35 rivers and streams
1:22:37 is having enough individual if we were
1:22:39 to keep it as is
1:22:40 having enough individuals who are
1:22:42 prepared to spend the kind of time
1:22:45 and energy that was previously spent
1:22:47 before the city had the resources for
1:22:50 uh experts to come in and review uh to
1:22:52 continue to commit to
1:22:54 the board i think one of the
1:22:55 frustrations is that the
1:22:57 group couldn't meet because we were
1:22:59 unable to assemble a number of
1:23:01 individuals that were committed
1:23:03 to meet as often as might be needed and
1:23:07 we have involved the remaining i think
1:23:09 it's two
1:23:10 members of rivers and streams in these
1:23:13 discussions again we had two
1:23:15 community meetings to talk about this
1:23:17 and i think
1:23:18 and i hesitate to talk for them
1:23:22 it was just a large amount of work that
1:23:24 was very difficult to find
1:23:26 local residents to be volunteers to do
1:23:28 you as the planning policy committee
1:23:31 you know perform extraordinary work it's
1:23:33 difficult to find residents that are
1:23:35 willing to do that and i think mayor
1:23:36 paulie's view
1:23:37 as we've talked about trying to
1:23:39 reorganize this
1:23:41 is to say let's have a citizens group
1:23:43 that's not reviewing individual projects
1:23:45 but instead is looking at the larger
1:23:47 policy questions and so that's
1:23:49 what we're attempting to do with this
1:23:51 change
1:23:53 so you said that there are two
1:23:56 additional
1:23:57 members of river and streams that would
1:24:00 like to continue
1:24:01 is there any way to at least incorporate
1:24:03 those two into the
1:24:04 development commission for a
1:24:07 certain amount of time or to take their
1:24:10 expertise
1:24:11 to uh and use it in the development
1:24:14 commission and and i'll i'll phone a
1:24:17 friend and mr niven
1:24:18 um to speak to how we might even begin
1:24:22 to do something like that i mean we
1:24:23 would need a quorum
1:24:25 um of those individuals on the
1:24:28 commission which we don't currently have
1:24:30 uh keith can you provide some additional
1:24:32 input to this
1:24:36 uh i can try good evening again planning
1:24:39 commission
1:24:39 so um so there could be um
1:24:43 you know you'd have to have open spots
1:24:45 uh within development commission
1:24:47 so i believe what we did
1:24:50 because of the pandemic was basically
1:24:54 um we suspended recruitment for boards
1:24:57 and commissions this year and we
1:24:59 basically just kind of
1:25:00 pushed it another year forward typically
1:25:04 what we do is we
1:25:05 recruit um and appoint new members in
1:25:09 um so you know if i don't believe we
1:25:13 have any vacancies on development
1:25:14 commission
1:25:15 currently um so you could
1:25:18 pass a a temporary ordinance increasing
1:25:22 the number of development commission
1:25:24 members
1:25:25 when you adopt this ordinance for the
1:25:27 environmental board
1:25:28 so sure that's possible if there were
1:25:31 uh two river streams members who wanted
1:25:34 to serve
1:25:35 on dc until the next
1:25:38 formal recruitment um i think you could
1:25:41 do that by an ordinance
1:25:42 uh that would go along with creating the
1:25:45 environmental board
1:25:46 um it would just amend that portion of
1:25:48 title 18 that deals with development
1:25:50 commission
1:25:51 you would just basically create an
1:25:53 interim time where maybe
1:25:55 instead of 10 members we have 12 members
1:25:59 does it have to be can they just be
1:26:01 advisors could you have to
1:26:03 go and change everything just for them
1:26:05 to be advisors to the board uh
1:26:08 not at all i mean so so you could you
1:26:12 so dc could always um decide to
1:26:15 invite those two members to their
1:26:17 meetings um
1:26:19 as you know advisors and maybe they
1:26:21 would hear from them before they opened
1:26:24 up any discussion uh for whatever was in
1:26:27 front of them so
1:26:29 so it could happen more informally as
1:26:31 well um
1:26:36 so to keith to that point uh
1:26:40 what about a joint commission with a you
1:26:43 still need a forum
1:26:44 of each participating
1:26:47 commission to have a joint commission
1:26:50 yeah you can't i mean
1:26:52 if you were gonna call a joint meeting
1:26:54 so the problem is
1:26:55 as the city administrator mentioned um
1:26:58 barely had a quorum for a really long
1:27:01 time on river and streams and then
1:27:03 uh one of the gentlemen uh rory
1:27:05 basically retired and moved to montana
1:27:07 and he actually came back for one or two
1:27:09 river streams meetings but then just
1:27:11 you know what i can't do this anymore so
1:27:14 so we were kind of we'd stretched it
1:27:15 about as far as we could
1:27:17 and without kind of opening a new
1:27:19 recruitment
1:27:20 and making a commitment to continue
1:27:22 river and streams for another year
1:27:25 we're kind of stuck with less of the
1:27:26 quorum as the city administrator
1:27:28 mentioned earlier
1:27:33 so i think it would be easy to take
1:27:36 their knowledge of what they've done
1:27:38 and how they've done it and use it
1:27:42 at least as an advisory part
1:27:45 in the development commission i think
1:27:48 that gap uh needs help
1:27:52 you can't just say here development
1:27:53 commission do this i mean
1:27:56 while this is all being planned you at
1:27:57 least need some
1:27:59 history involved in it so i would
1:28:02 certainly recommend that they be
1:28:04 encouraged to
1:28:05 be at least advisors
1:28:08 is there any other
1:28:12 first of all i think commissioner
1:28:14 beukers had a comment
1:28:19 yeah uh just problem keepers
1:28:23 after reading i was struck when reading
1:28:25 the comments from the
1:28:33 thoughtfulness and the precision of the
1:28:36 comments
1:28:37 and and then listening to some of the
1:28:40 explanations coming from
1:28:42 the city they didn't cities view the
1:28:46 role of rivers and seem to differ from
1:28:50 from the the assessment from the very
1:28:53 least connie martin
1:28:54 um so at the very least what i would
1:28:58 like to hear
1:28:59 is not now necessarily but not now at
1:29:02 but a response from city staff
1:29:06 to those comments because i'm confused
1:29:09 and the
1:29:10 second thing i thought i was going to
1:29:12 see the actual wording of the ordinance
1:29:15 apparently that's not the case so i came
1:29:17 fully informed
1:29:19 um but i'm not sure how i can make any
1:29:22 informed decision one way or the other
1:29:24 without seeing the wording of what we're
1:29:26 supposed to recommend
1:29:28 so i'll leave those two comments there
1:29:31 i'm certainly and i add my comments to
1:29:34 joe lewis's
1:29:35 i'm certainly not comfortable with where
1:29:37 we sit
1:29:38 now and being asked to say anything
1:29:40 definitive
1:29:41 about this subject um just don't have
1:29:44 the basis right now
1:29:45 and need some more input and response
1:29:47 from the city at the very least
1:29:50 and then to see the precise wording of
1:29:52 the document we're supposed to uh
1:29:54 uh pass just on so there's my comment
1:29:57 thank you
1:29:59 so there's a comment from commissioner
1:30:04 boyce
1:30:06 thank you madam chair so this one i
1:30:08 guess could go to mr niven
1:30:10 is if you guys are have struggling
1:30:12 having a quorum for rivers and streams
1:30:14 and you guys have suspended um
1:30:18 basically recruitment for boards and
1:30:20 commissions this year
1:30:23 why are we trying to start a new board
1:30:25 right now
1:30:28 and what what's what's the thinking
1:30:29 behind being able to recruit
1:30:31 people for this particular board when
1:30:33 we're struggling to have
1:30:34 rivers and streams be successful
1:30:39 i'm going to go ahead and defer that
1:30:41 question to the city administrator
1:30:42 because i think he's better qualified to
1:30:44 answer that than i might be
1:30:46 sure uh again uh commissioner voice uh
1:30:50 members of the commission
1:30:53 uh this is a long time issue before the
1:30:56 city council
1:30:56 uh mayor paulie members of the council
1:30:58 have been very frustrated
1:31:00 with uh what has been going on with
1:31:03 rivers and streams
1:31:04 and they really are looking for a
1:31:05 solution uh this what we've put together
1:31:09 shared with the council have shared
1:31:10 during two community meetings
1:31:12 is the solution that we're attempting to
1:31:14 move forward with to keep
1:31:16 the issues on a higher plane we've heard
1:31:19 from many members of the community
1:31:21 with the desire to not look at every
1:31:25 development project that comes through
1:31:27 every building permit that comes through
1:31:29 we're hearing from members of the
1:31:30 community that they want to have that
1:31:32 larger
1:31:32 scale discussion of environmental issues
1:31:36 facing issaquah
1:31:37 they i think it's a broad
1:31:40 sense of issues and there's lots of
1:31:42 community members are interested in that
1:31:44 there are many many fewer community
1:31:46 members who are interested in reviewing
1:31:48 specific applications learning the
1:31:50 development code learning
1:31:52 title 18. we're we're not hearing from
1:31:55 residents that they're interested in
1:31:56 doing that what we are hearing from
1:31:58 residents
1:31:58 is that they want to be involved in
1:32:00 those broader larger discussions
1:32:02 and so the council decided through uh
1:32:06 the copa 19 crisis and mayor paulie uh
1:32:09 with her direction and their concurrence
1:32:11 not to recruit for any of the boards and
1:32:13 commissions just given everything else
1:32:14 that's going on in the world
1:32:16 but with an eye that this solution of a
1:32:18 new board was coming down the road and
1:32:20 knowing
1:32:20 that there are many individuals
1:32:22 interested in serving on this new
1:32:24 commission with the broader scope again
1:32:26 the challenge is
1:32:27 uh will we find people to want to
1:32:30 continue to serve on rivers and streams
1:32:32 for the last couple of years we have not
1:32:33 been able to find this key
1:32:34 described when you have the last person
1:32:37 on quorum
1:32:38 um coming back from montana just to keep
1:32:41 the board going
1:32:42 i mean in the eyes of mayor paulie and
1:32:43 the council that just wasn't wasn't
1:32:45 workable moving forward so what you have
1:32:46 before you tonight
1:32:48 is our best solution uh to deal with
1:32:50 this that we do not believe
1:32:52 that continuing rivers and streams in
1:32:54 the manner that it was
1:32:56 was sustainable in part because we don't
1:32:58 know that we'll have people
1:32:59 willing to devote the time to do that we
1:33:01 have that's not been our experience the
1:33:03 last few years so
1:33:04 what you have before you is what we have
1:33:06 the ordinance is you have an ordinance
1:33:08 in your packet that is the language
1:33:09 i think megan indicated only that there
1:33:11 were additional comments by the council
1:33:14 for some changes so those changes will
1:33:16 likely be incorporated
1:33:18 by the council when they make a final
1:33:19 determination
1:33:21 i guess my concern is is again if we're
1:33:23 not recruiting
1:33:24 for boards and commissions and then you
1:33:27 know this idea and i i'm
1:33:28 actually for the environmental board
1:33:30 that's really not my issue but the idea
1:33:32 just a lot of community interest is
1:33:35 again that
1:33:36 that's exactly not necessarily the type
1:33:38 of people i don't think
1:33:39 a lot i can only speak for myself um
1:33:42 i'd like to see people like in the
1:33:44 sciences again people that were in
1:33:46 rivers and streams i'm not looking for
1:33:48 uh climate activists to be populating
1:33:50 this environmental board that's going to
1:33:52 have such overreaching
1:33:54 authority in aspects of our community
1:33:58 so what's being proposed is they won't
1:34:02 have that
1:34:03 they will they will be they will not
1:34:04 have project review what they will have
1:34:07 is an opportunity to weigh in on plans
1:34:10 on laws
1:34:11 that ultimately are decided by others
1:34:12 that are ultimately decided by the
1:34:14 development commission
1:34:15 or the city council one of the one of
1:34:18 the cold hard facts of a job like mine
1:34:21 is finding enough citizens to
1:34:23 participate in democracy
1:34:24 and to participate in the work that we
1:34:26 need to do to continue to move the
1:34:28 community forward
1:34:30 finding those people with technical
1:34:32 expertise as you describe commissioner
1:34:34 who live within the city of issaquah who
1:34:36 want to do that work who want to spend
1:34:38 multiple nights
1:34:39 a month on that those numbers of people
1:34:42 are very very hard to come by not only
1:34:43 in issaquah but in all communities
1:34:45 so that that that's just the real part
1:34:47 of our challenge moving forward
1:34:53 uh there's comment from commissioner
1:34:55 carly
1:34:58 yes this is janice carl um i uh
1:35:02 can you hear me yeah okay um i
1:35:05 absolutely appreciate that
1:35:07 um that it's hard to get
1:35:13 folks interested in project level work
1:35:15 and appreciate that the
1:35:17 city has grown to the point where that
1:35:20 staffing and that expertise is available
1:35:23 either in-house or through consultants
1:35:25 however
1:35:25 it sounds to me as though there have
1:35:29 specific projects going through rivers
1:35:32 and stream
1:35:33 for review that are not going to end up
1:35:36 on development commission's
1:35:40 agenda even if we bring in these two
1:35:43 stellar performers from rivers and
1:35:45 stream to weigh in on them
1:35:47 those projects would not appear before
1:35:51 and so i want to know where in the
1:35:54 project review flow chart those projects
1:35:58 are going to get attention from staff
1:36:01 or other resources so that we make sure
1:36:04 all those projects that we're getting an
1:36:07 environmental
1:36:08 evaluation are continuing to do so even
1:36:11 with the diminishment of
1:36:13 the the removal of rivers and streams
1:36:16 from the project
1:36:18 thank you
1:36:21 um which one of you would like to take
1:36:23 that question
1:36:25 i i think dr niven can speak to the
1:36:28 environmental review that projects
1:36:30 receive
1:36:31 let me start and maybe we'll tag team
1:36:33 this one so
1:36:35 so i want to i want to be clear because
1:36:37 i think there's been a little bit of
1:36:38 confusion with some of the comments that
1:36:40 came in and
1:36:41 commissioner bukers asked for i think a
1:36:43 clarification of
1:36:45 uh some of the things that miss marsh
1:36:47 had said so
1:36:48 to be clear riven streams were not a
1:36:51 decision maker
1:36:52 so they did not review applications and
1:36:55 make decisions
1:36:56 yes or no what they did is they provided
1:36:59 recommendations
1:37:00 that were then either considered by the
1:37:02 development commission
1:37:04 or staff or the city council depending
1:37:07 on who the ultimate decision maker was
1:37:10 so they were as you heard from ms marsh
1:37:14 they were our opportunity to get
1:37:15 something beyond what's in code
1:37:18 well you know i think that there's
1:37:21 there's
1:37:21 that's a whole conversation in and of
1:37:23 itself on
1:37:24 on that piece of this um what i would
1:37:28 say is
1:37:28 there are there are projects um that
1:37:31 went to river streams uh
1:37:34 and and she's right uh they don't go to
1:37:37 development commission for example
1:37:39 you know somebody wanting to do an
1:37:41 expansion uh
1:37:43 on the back of their house if they're
1:37:44 next to is a quack creek
1:37:46 that's not going to go to development
1:37:47 commission um you know but
1:37:50 but but there was also something in miss
1:37:52 fletcher's
1:37:53 letter that said we were taking uh
1:37:56 code away um so the code that
1:38:00 regulates what you can and can't do in
1:38:02 critical areas
1:38:03 is not being changed by getting rid of
1:38:05 the river and streams board
1:38:07 what the river and streams board did was
1:38:09 provide another set of eyes
1:38:11 and another opinion on some of those
1:38:13 projects that
1:38:15 were proximate to wetlands
1:38:18 and streams and so so if your question
1:38:22 commission commissioner carl is is who's
1:38:25 going to do that
1:38:27 it it becomes incumbent upon staff
1:38:30 and the consultants that we use to
1:38:32 evaluate those projects if they are
1:38:35 approximate to those critical areas on
1:38:38 how they might
1:38:38 impact those critical areas if they
1:38:41 aren't if they aren't going to
1:38:42 ultimately be something that goes to
1:38:44 state development commission down the
1:38:49 so again this is janice carl so it
1:38:52 sounds as though we'll also
1:38:53 be relying on members of our community
1:38:58 to also step up on those specific
1:39:00 projects that are of interest to them
1:39:02 in their local neighborhoods or across
1:39:04 the city
1:39:06 absolutely i mean that's one of the
1:39:08 reasons why
1:39:09 you know the city has an active project
1:39:11 map uh
1:39:13 to show what kind what things are being
1:39:16 built and developed around town you know
1:39:19 we try to
1:39:20 engage with our community as much as
1:39:22 possible on
1:39:23 curing uh impacts and and and just as a
1:39:27 all of those projects um
1:39:30 that are within or adjacent to critical
1:39:32 areas uh even a road project
1:39:34 uh assuming you know 99
1:39:38 of them uh have to go through a cipa
1:39:40 review
1:39:41 and then that that review has a public
1:39:44 comment period it has a posting
1:39:46 requirement
1:39:47 and then there's also an appeal
1:39:49 opportunity if somebody doesn't like
1:39:51 um you know what ultimately the staff
1:39:53 and or the consultants have recommended
1:39:56 so there's definitely a legitimate
1:39:58 process um that
1:39:59 is public uh for those type of things as
1:40:04 thank you very much that was helpful
1:40:07 there's a comment from commissioner
1:40:09 lewis
1:40:15 thank you joan uh commissioner joy lewis
1:40:19 this i'm hearing that rivers and streams
1:40:22 as it was originally created wasn't
1:40:25 working for us anymore
1:40:27 i'm hearing that the technical reviews
1:40:29 that they
1:40:30 uh that there was a roles and
1:40:32 responsibilities
1:40:33 is now covered with other resources
1:40:37 what i'm what i'm hearing is that
1:40:39 there's a huge commitment from the
1:40:40 community
1:40:41 for not only this entire area of
1:40:43 interest but also for the creation
1:40:45 of this new climate change oriented
1:40:48 board
1:40:49 what i would like to see is actually a
1:40:51 white paper
1:40:52 on why rivers and streams needs to be
1:40:55 updated
1:40:56 not disbanded i would like to see how if
1:40:59 no longer are able to find people with a
1:41:01 technical expertise
1:41:03 then maybe they can serve in a different
1:41:05 role what i'm hearing is that there's a
1:41:06 huge amount of people who want to be
1:41:08 involved in this issue
1:41:09 so let's give them more voice that's the
1:41:12 whole point of why we have these boards
1:41:14 and commissions is to be able to give
1:41:16 more opportunities for the public to
1:41:18 come together and have these discussions
1:41:20 what i'm hearing is that these
1:41:21 discussions around the specific issue of
1:41:24 this formation
1:41:25 of this new board needs to continue what
1:41:28 i'm not hearing
1:41:29 is that it's appropriate to completely
1:41:32 disband rivers and streams
1:41:33 in its entirety i think what needs to
1:41:35 happen is that rivers and streams
1:41:37 needs to be updated i agree it's not
1:41:39 working the same way that it did 30
1:41:41 years ago
1:41:42 and i think that that needs to adapt and
1:41:44 to change but right
1:41:46 now when i look at the board proposals
1:41:48 i'm not seeing something
1:41:50 that looks like it's able to be
1:41:51 completely tackled in real time
1:41:54 by one board i'm seeing
1:41:57 weird half measures like we want to have
1:42:00 youth involvement so let's throw a
1:42:02 couple seats
1:42:04 to some over eager high schoolers i
1:42:06 don't know that that's actually solving
1:42:08 um what we actually do need is youth
1:42:10 involvement i think instead the high
1:42:12 school
1:42:13 needs to have formed their own board and
1:42:14 commission that looks at
1:42:16 all kinds of things and then some more
1:42:18 submits their own thing
1:42:19 to uh to council independently and we
1:42:22 can even have a youth board
1:42:23 um i would love to have their opinion on
1:42:25 a variety of things i mean even
1:42:27 signage i'm positive that there are high
1:42:29 schoolers and people in our community
1:42:30 who want to be more active and giving
1:42:32 them that voice is great
1:42:35 this it feels to me like kind of just
1:42:37 throwing a bone at them i mean
1:42:39 we have a proposal here that actually
1:42:41 says that carrying out
1:42:42 other duties as may be prescribed by
1:42:45 city ordinance or directed by the mayor
1:42:48 i don't see that as being highly
1:42:50 technical or competent in all the ways
1:42:52 that we need right now what i see this
1:42:54 is like
1:42:54 some sort of weird like cya i mean if it
1:42:57 doesn't fit in the stated duties
1:42:59 then i mean shouldn't that shouldn't it
1:43:01 be defined right now i just i
1:43:03 i mean proposal number eight kind of
1:43:04 baffles me i mean i see
1:43:06 um i see a lot of issues actually right
1:43:08 now and i think that you could have an
1:43:10 entire
1:43:10 rivers and streams board just on
1:43:12 proposal number one
1:43:14 when we talk about title 18 when we talk
1:43:17 about shoreline management
1:43:18 these are big things that require a lot
1:43:21 of time just to get
1:43:22 up to speed on much less be able to then
1:43:26 competent feedback to staff about how
1:43:29 we're going to be opening this up
1:43:31 to then add on to that the creation of
1:43:33 this new board is something that i don't
1:43:35 see is
1:43:36 being presented to me right here right
1:43:38 now as being something that is able to
1:43:40 move forward as is
1:43:46 ah there's a comment from commissioner
1:43:53 thanks kind of bear i'll make this
1:43:55 really quick so when i went through
1:43:57 junior college uh i my original major
1:44:00 was actually
1:44:01 in environmental protection uh
1:44:04 when i went to san jose state
1:44:07 one of the things i was also part of was
1:44:09 the outdoor club and
1:44:11 we tried to put together an
1:44:12 environmental club so looking at the
1:44:14 high school
1:44:15 we want to put youth on there what if we
1:44:17 put assign a club like the environmental
1:44:21 which would be maybe students with
1:44:23 chemistry background
1:44:24 and biology background and let them have
1:44:27 team voice on a commission
1:44:31 that would be a great way to involve the
1:44:33 high school
1:44:35 but outside of that i'm also in
1:44:39 i agree with joy's comments and i don't
1:44:42 know that we are actually ready
1:44:43 to make a decision tonight on
1:44:48 the proposal that's in front of us thank
1:44:53 does anybody else want to make a comment
1:44:59 okay do we have a motion to approve
1:45:02 do we have a a motion to continue
1:45:06 what is the feeling of the commission
1:45:21 manager may i make a suggestion yes
1:45:27 we would be happy to come back and bring
1:45:29 additional information
1:45:30 i think the the question on my mind is
1:45:33 additional information would be helpful
1:45:37 we are coming from the city council they
1:45:38 have reviewed this ordinance
1:45:40 uh the direction the staff has been
1:45:42 given by the city council
1:45:44 is to come up with a board that is
1:45:46 different than what rivers and streams
1:45:48 and so we can come with additional
1:45:51 information
1:45:53 to you at a future meeting i think we
1:45:55 will continue to report back to the city
1:45:57 council
1:45:58 because many of the components that you
1:46:00 have been talking about this evening
1:46:02 have been those components that the city
1:46:03 council has already indicated
1:46:05 that they're in favor of and so it would
1:46:07 just be helpful to know what additional
1:46:09 information we could bring back
1:46:11 to a future meeting because then
1:46:12 ultimately whatever comments
1:46:14 this group makes we're going to have to
1:46:16 reconcile with
1:46:17 the direction that we've been given by
1:46:19 the city council so if that would be
1:46:21 helpful we could then come back at a
1:46:23 time that would be convenient for you
1:46:26 i think the biggest thing is
1:46:27 clarification on the wording
1:46:32 i think there have been several comments
1:46:34 this tonight about
1:46:35 it it wasn't clear who did what when
1:46:38 they did it
1:46:39 and just some clarifications
1:46:43 that i see in the document
1:46:47 and i listened to what the city council
1:46:49 said and
1:46:50 and we i think we have addressed just
1:46:54 about everything the city council
1:46:57 did talk about i was
1:47:00 disappointed because
1:47:04 at the point where the document is right
1:47:06 now it should be a
1:47:07 finished document it should be this is
1:47:10 we are proposing instead of we'll come
1:47:13 back and change the language
1:47:15 later and i think that's what's
1:47:17 affecting this whole
1:47:20 discussion and um
1:47:24 the city council said the same thing we
1:47:26 need some additional
1:47:28 uh clarification in the proposals
1:47:32 so ma'am chair if we were to go back to
1:47:34 the council again the the language
1:47:36 that we that megan indicated we were
1:47:39 going to make a few changes to
1:47:41 is based on the council's comments we
1:47:43 can take those uh changes back to the
1:47:45 city council at
1:47:46 september 8th meeting um then come back
1:47:48 to you and then come back to the council
1:47:51 if that would make sense what is the
1:47:54 decision
1:47:55 of the commission
1:48:00 somebody's got to comment on this hi
1:48:04 this is megan i just wanted to add um i
1:48:06 apologize for the confusion during the
1:48:08 presentation
1:48:09 about changing language um i think what
1:48:12 i had meant there was that
1:48:13 we received some some public comment
1:48:16 before
1:48:17 the meeting and about some of the
1:48:20 wording around it and i wanted to
1:48:21 acknowledge that we
1:48:22 were hearing from the public that they
1:48:24 weren't happy with the way the objective
1:48:26 was written now
1:48:27 and we also heard that same language
1:48:29 from the council specifically that
1:48:31 the objective is written to
1:48:35 advise sorry i'm just going to pull it
1:48:37 up to make
1:48:39 it clear as clear as possible
1:48:43 the objective now is the objective of
1:48:45 the environmental board is to advise the
1:48:47 mayor city council
1:48:48 and city departments on the city's plans
1:48:51 policies regulations and programs
1:48:53 relating to the protection of the
1:48:55 environment and climate change
1:48:56 and we had heard comments from one of
1:49:00 the community members about wanting to
1:49:02 it so that we are um the objective of
1:49:06 the environmental board is to protect
1:49:07 the environment and climate change so
1:49:09 it's just kind of switching
1:49:10 that order but basically keeping keeping
1:49:12 it very similar but um
1:49:14 changing that around a little bit so
1:49:16 that is what i was referring to in my
1:49:17 presentation
1:49:18 um the ordinance that we have here is is
1:49:21 that final version that um
1:49:23 that the council had seen before and had
1:49:26 comments on
1:49:27 so i apologize i just wanted to make
1:49:29 that clarification and
1:49:30 recognize that we are hearing that from
1:49:32 the community that they wanted that
1:49:33 change
1:49:35 have you made the changes that the
1:49:37 council recommended
1:49:40 no no further changes have been made
1:49:45 okay i need the recommendation of the
1:49:48 commission
1:49:49 so i will go through and start with
1:49:52 commissioner boyce so i actually
1:49:56 appreciate um administrator bobkowitz
1:50:00 suggestion again i'm all for an
1:50:02 environmental board
1:50:04 i i do need more information as you as
1:50:06 i'm sure everybody could tell i was
1:50:07 definitely having a hard time following
1:50:09 along on some of the objectives
1:50:11 i do believe there's a few things that
1:50:12 need to be clarified i do understand
1:50:15 that they won't be involved in the
1:50:17 decision making process any more than
1:50:19 the planning policy is
1:50:20 my concern is the overlap because
1:50:23 again if they're creating policies and
1:50:25 goals that's wonderful but we're
1:50:27 also i guess i'm looking to see what
1:50:30 this what their actual scope is
1:50:33 again we're talking about title 18 and
1:50:34 that's wonderful but
1:50:36 we're not creating a whole new board to
1:50:37 tackle one subject
1:50:39 so again a more narrow scope or
1:50:42 a more defined scope is a better word so
1:50:45 i appreciate uh administrator bobcoit's
1:50:48 suggestion
1:50:49 again that's what i'm looking for
1:50:54 so if we decide tonight to not go
1:50:56 forward with this
1:50:58 uh city administrator when
1:51:01 and it it's going to go back to the city
1:51:03 council for more discussion on that on
1:51:05 september the 8th
1:51:07 if that if we bring it back to us
1:51:10 does that take a whole nother month
1:51:14 uh i i'm unfamiliar exactly with your
1:51:17 meeting schedule
1:51:18 we would be going to the city council on
1:51:20 the 8th we'll make the
1:51:21 adjustments that uh ms curtis murphy had
1:51:25 mentioned
1:51:25 and then we would come back unless
1:51:27 there's additional information that
1:51:29 you're looking for
1:51:30 those are going to be the only changes
1:51:31 we're going to be taking to the city
1:51:32 council
1:51:33 as well as sharing i think just the
1:51:36 issues that were raised here
1:51:37 um so we would be ready to come back
1:51:39 after september 8th
1:51:41 so mr nevin i'm not sure what the next
1:51:43 meeting would be then after
1:51:45 that or miss leeson the town it would be
1:51:48 thursday the 10th
1:51:50 of september
1:51:53 well then i think we'd be ready to come
1:51:55 back on the 10th
1:51:58 okay um commissioner fowle
1:52:02 what is your suggestion
1:52:11 i appreciate
1:52:14 mr bob quits um comment there and and
1:52:17 bringing this back to
1:52:19 for further discussion uh on the 10th
1:52:22 and that's in line with my my thought
1:52:25 process as well i don't think we're
1:52:26 ready to make a decision tonight
1:52:30 commissioner buechers
1:52:35 i also am not ready to make a decision i
1:52:37 would like a specific
1:52:39 response responses from the city to the
1:52:43 public comments and i gained my comment
1:52:45 earlier that that thought they were
1:52:47 thoughtful and
1:52:48 and and and well well put forward uh i'd
1:52:51 like to understand
1:52:52 the city's response where they agree
1:52:54 disagree and how they position itself so
1:52:56 secondly i just have a larger concern
1:52:58 uh given the vastness of this uh of
1:53:01 this subject and the scope that the
1:53:04 environmental board
1:53:05 is is being asked to uh take on
1:53:09 with differing sets of skills i i just
1:53:11 really do wonder
1:53:12 in one board with nine individuals with
1:53:16 skills and they're not
1:53:17 particularly well defined here you have
1:53:19 an orientation
1:53:20 towards technical skills and then two
1:53:23 juniors on top of that which are i'm not
1:53:25 sure what the representation is
1:53:26 i have a concern that that board will be
1:53:28 affected so
1:53:30 um that's so i'm certainly not ready to
1:53:33 any recommendation tonight one way or
1:53:35 the other uh and i have those overriding
1:53:37 concerns
1:53:38 thank you commissioner carl
1:53:47 um yes i think it seems to me
1:53:50 that the this is janice carl sorry it
1:53:53 seems to me that the biggest concern
1:53:57 is the lack of specificity as to the
1:54:00 revision
1:54:00 of the wording of the ordinance and
1:54:04 then we would like all possible to keep
1:54:07 city council
1:54:08 on schedule we could have do we not have
1:54:12 a meeting scheduled
1:54:13 tentatively for the 27th i know we've
1:54:15 been meeting highly irregularly
1:54:17 but wouldn't the 27th of august be a
1:54:20 regular meeting for us
1:54:22 and is it not possible that we could
1:54:24 review that language
1:54:25 at that time that's all i have to say
1:54:30 hi this is kristin leeson with community
1:54:33 planning and development and
1:54:35 we do not currently the 27th would be a
1:54:37 regular meeting we do not have one
1:54:39 scheduled
1:54:39 i don't know if megan could get it
1:54:42 turned
1:54:43 and the administration could get it
1:54:44 turned around that quickly
1:54:46 i'd have to check with them we also have
1:54:48 one already scheduled though for
1:54:50 the 10th and at that point you would
1:54:52 hear council comments as well
1:54:55 and if i may um it's august
1:54:59 i'm sitting here as my family is trying
1:55:01 to enjoy a few days
1:55:02 out by a lake i i think all of you have
1:55:06 i would hope similar plans that if you
1:55:08 don't make them um
1:55:09 i think thank you for the thought but i
1:55:11 think if we can come back shortly after
1:55:13 the council's
1:55:14 uh discussion on the eighth that that's
1:55:16 perfectly sufficient we want to keep
1:55:18 this moving forward it's been a long
1:55:19 time issue
1:55:20 uh but given the time of year and given
1:55:22 the year we've all had
1:55:24 we would not ask you to come back at the
1:55:26 end of august for a meeting
1:55:28 so on the meeting on september the 8th
1:55:32 will you present to the city council
1:55:35 uh the recommendations and concerns that
1:55:38 we've
1:55:39 discussed at this meeting
1:55:42 absolutely and madam chair i was that's
1:55:43 what i was trying to suss out a little
1:55:45 from you and i appreciate your comments
1:55:48 in the comments of some of your
1:55:49 colleagues
1:55:49 as to what exactly we can share because
1:55:51 i think the staff's dilemma
1:55:53 with some of this is that i think the
1:55:55 council is going in one direction and
1:55:57 some members of this group are going in
1:55:58 a different direction
1:56:00 and so we can share that in general
1:56:03 terms
1:56:04 but again the council uh you know did
1:56:07 prepare the ordinance that you've seen
1:56:09 without these minor changes to it and
1:56:11 we'll be back to you then really with
1:56:13 those minor
1:56:14 changes unless the council
1:56:17 after hearing your comments changes
1:56:18 course substantially which i guess
1:56:20 certainly they could
1:56:21 um but if there's anything else other
1:56:23 than making sure that there's a final
1:56:25 version of the ordinance
1:56:27 that the council has signed off on if
1:56:29 there's any other
1:56:30 specific comments that we should be
1:56:32 prepared to address
1:56:34 with you at your meeting on the 10th
1:56:35 then please let me know
1:56:37 so i don't think any ordinance or
1:56:40 document
1:56:41 is going to be perfect and incorporates
1:56:44 every single idea from every single
1:56:46 person
1:56:47 and so um i think we have to realize
1:56:50 that we need to get this started
1:56:52 and underway and i think somebody had
1:56:55 the comment
1:56:56 or question earlier um
1:57:00 what do we do if uh there needs to be
1:57:03 changes
1:57:05 and i think at that time we could be
1:57:09 look at more clarification or more
1:57:11 changes if it doesn't work
1:57:13 so this is a new project um
1:57:17 i don't think the city the ppc
1:57:22 you know can equate right now
1:57:26 what the perfect solution is and have
1:57:28 everything
1:57:29 settled so hopefully we can get through
1:57:31 most of it
1:57:32 and uh uh as long as you present some of
1:57:36 concerns we have to the city council
1:57:38 they can discuss it on the 8th
1:57:40 and then we can have a short discussion
1:57:42 on the 10th
1:57:43 to to make sure that it's to our
1:57:46 satisfaction
1:57:47 and then we can go from there
1:57:51 i did have a uh
1:57:54 any comment from commissioner reichert
1:57:57 did you want to make one
1:58:04 yes sorry which commissioner you
1:58:07 oh um so i i would second your
1:58:11 opinion uh i'm sure
1:58:15 um i i think we need to
1:58:17 [Music]
1:58:18 move this forward as soon as we can i
1:58:20 think it's a great idea it's been a long
1:58:21 time coming
1:58:22 um i definitely respect the the view of
1:58:25 the majority of the commissioners
1:58:27 um and will and also endorse
1:58:30 uh coming back on the 10th with revised
1:58:33 language i think my only concern right
1:58:34 now is just looking at
1:58:36 um making sure that we have clear
1:58:37 details on how the
1:58:39 the new proposed board is structured as
1:58:41 it relates to the other
1:58:43 uh committees and boards um as well as
1:58:46 city council
1:58:47 but i also agree that we're never going
1:58:49 to have a perfect solution right out of
1:58:50 the gate and it's going to be a work in
1:58:52 progress
1:58:53 and we need to start this sooner than
1:58:54 later so i'd like to see
1:58:56 the clarified language on the 10th
1:59:00 and then hopefully be in the position to
1:59:02 move forward at that point
1:59:05 does anybody else want to make a comment
1:59:13 hearing none
1:59:16 i'm assuming that the that exactly what
1:59:20 commissioner reinhardt said is the
1:59:22 uh belief of the commission
1:59:26 to continue on and have a further
1:59:29 discussion
1:59:30 on the 10th yeah am i correct
1:59:33 okay excuse me madam chair
1:59:36 i'm um i just want to be sure however
1:59:38 that we
1:59:39 continue formally continue the public
1:59:42 hearing to september 10th
1:59:45 um considering the fact that i've closed
1:59:47 it what would you like me to do
1:59:50 um i i think you can probably open it
1:59:54 up for just a sec i apologize i didn't
1:59:58 hear the words i've closed the public
1:59:59 hearing so that's my bad
2:00:04 do you have to there could be a there
2:00:06 could be a motion to reconsider
2:00:08 okay thank you do i hear emotion
2:00:13 i'd like to make a motion to oh i am um
2:00:20 i'd like to make a motion to reconsider
2:00:22 and table our decision to
2:00:24 um august 10
2:00:28 concerning the um public hearing
2:00:34 is your is your motion to consider
2:00:42 so my motion is to table the
2:00:45 public hearing until continue the public
2:00:49 hearing to continue the
2:00:50 public hearing until september 10th
2:00:53 let's suck at that emotion
2:00:55 all those in favor aye aye
2:00:58 did i have to take a roll call for
2:01:05 kristen i'd say to be safe we do that
2:01:10 okay who would like to take the role
2:01:17 okay i can i can do that you roll oh all
2:01:20 right
2:01:20 go for it okay uh commissioner carl
2:01:25 uh hi commissioner voice
2:01:29 hi commissioner lewis i
2:01:33 commissioner fall hi mr bukers
2:01:37 yes commissioner reinhardt hi
2:01:41 and i would like to note that at the
2:01:42 beginning of the meeting it was noted
2:01:43 that there were six members present but
2:01:45 there are seven and mr beakers is
2:01:46 sitting in the regular seat which is
2:01:53 okay so uh the public hearing will be
2:01:56 continued on
2:01:58 uh until september the 10th where we
2:02:01 will have a discussion
2:02:02 on the environmental commission
2:02:06 formation with that
2:02:12 we are going to move right along to our
2:02:19 uh regular business
2:02:22 which is a discussion on the mobility
2:02:24 master plan
2:02:26 review and update and for that i'd like
2:02:28 to ask
2:02:30 senior planner stephen is it padua
2:02:33 to make a presentation yes madam chair
2:02:37 it's uh
2:02:38 it's stephen padua thank you um and
2:02:40 thank you to the members of the
2:02:41 commission
2:02:42 i am looking at the time tonight um
2:02:45 would you like to me
2:02:46 to proceed with the presentations about
2:02:49 10 minutes and then open it up for
2:02:50 discussion
2:02:52 alternatively what i can do is
2:02:55 either go through the presentation and
2:02:57 then try to schedule time
2:03:00 or have each of you send me feedback and
2:03:02 questions via email
2:03:04 um or i can send you to the presentation
2:03:07 and you can send me questions and
2:03:09 comments via email what would you
2:03:12 prefer me to do i want to respect
2:03:14 everybody's time tonight
2:03:15 kristen um are we supposed to
2:03:19 to actually make a motion and uh go
2:03:22 forward on this
2:03:23 or is this just for discussion this
2:03:24 evening this is kristin leeson this is
2:03:27 just for discussion
2:03:28 this evening if they're going to come
2:03:33 so here's here's what's happening it was
2:03:35 going to be part of my report later
2:03:37 um it will come back to you it will not
2:03:40 come back until
2:03:41 right now it's not planned to come back
2:03:43 until the public hearing for the
2:03:45 comprehensive plan which is the first
2:03:46 meeting in october
2:03:49 um so we wanted to bring this to you
2:03:52 tonight
2:03:53 so that you could provide any feedback
2:03:55 this is also going to counsel on
2:03:57 september 8th
2:03:58 and we wanted you to be able to hear it
2:04:00 and provide any feedback before it goes
2:04:01 to council and before it comes back to
2:04:03 our comprehensive plan public hearing
2:04:07 okay so why don't we have a short
2:04:10 presentation
2:04:11 of what the main positions are the main
2:04:15 changes
2:04:16 i know that when i went through the 100
2:04:19 uh presentation it it got a little
2:04:22 confusing
2:04:24 so if you can just take the high points
2:04:26 tonight and then
2:04:27 we'll have the opportunity to further
2:04:31 look through the
2:04:35 paperwork and if there are any questions
2:04:37 then uh
2:04:38 we can send them directly to kristin and
2:04:41 she can forward them on to you
2:04:45 so that sounds great to me thank you
2:04:47 madam chair
2:04:48 so i will quickly share my screen now
2:05:01 okay so again thank you
2:05:05 for the members of the commission for
2:05:06 having you tonight um
2:05:09 i'm going to give a brief presentation
2:05:11 on the mobility master plan
2:05:13 and uh i'll hope to get questions
2:05:16 comments from you via email
2:05:17 following the presentation and next time
2:05:20 i see you
2:05:21 questions we'll go to kristin oh go to
2:05:23 kristen and then i'll
2:05:25 i'll coordinate with her thank you
2:05:29 so to clarify things a bit um what's
2:05:31 going to city council
2:05:33 on september 8th is the approval of a
2:05:36 resolution which will recognize the
2:05:37 process
2:05:38 that we went through to develop the
2:05:39 mobility master plan
2:05:41 which was a separate process from the
2:05:43 comp plan and then what's going to
2:05:44 happen is
2:05:45 we're going to add ask city council to
2:05:48 add the mobility master plan to the comp
2:05:50 plan docket
2:05:51 which is why it will be part of the
2:05:52 october public hearing
2:05:57 and then what i'm hoping to do is be
2:06:00 able to work with
2:06:01 the planning commission to be able to
2:06:02 work through any of the edits uh
2:06:04 leading up to the october meeting now
2:06:07 the purpose of the master plan is
2:06:08 to be the city's long-range planning
2:06:10 document for our transportation system
2:06:13 this includes the consolidation of
2:06:15 pre-existing
2:06:16 transportation policies so that city
2:06:17 staff have one document to guide our
2:06:20 but it also replaces the transportation
2:06:22 in the comprehensive plan
2:06:24 and absorbs the walk-and-roll plan all
2:06:26 the policies
2:06:27 and what's being proposed walkable plans
2:06:29 gets absorbed into the mobility mesh
2:06:31 plan and it supports
2:06:32 some area plans but it's not super
2:06:34 exceeding our sub area plans
2:06:37 now we've been working with the
2:06:39 transportation advisory board
2:06:40 for a little over a year and a half now
2:06:43 since they were formed in early 2019 to
2:06:45 develop the master plan
2:06:47 and and they've been thoroughly engaged
2:06:49 with the project team throughout this
2:06:51 whole process the development of the
2:06:52 guiding principles
2:06:53 of the policies as well as the process
2:06:56 as we've kind of had to change the
2:06:57 schedule
2:06:58 and they are thoroughly
2:07:03 satisfied with what's coming out of the
2:07:06 plan in terms of highlighting safety
2:07:08 highlighting climate change access
2:07:12 as well as elevating walking and riding
2:07:13 a bike as part of our transportation
2:07:15 network
2:07:17 now for engagement we initiated the
2:07:20 process for engagement early in 2019
2:07:22 where
2:07:23 we developed the guiding principles and
2:07:25 as well as the initial policies
2:07:27 and then took on a second phase of
2:07:28 engagement later in 2019 when we formed
2:07:31 the prioritization and metrics
2:07:33 as well as further developed the
2:07:34 policies and 2020
2:07:37 we started engagement earlier this year
2:07:40 due to covet pandemic we had to pause it
2:07:43 and then we
2:07:44 picked it back up in july with the
2:07:45 survey and
2:07:47 committee discussions as well as
2:07:49 discussions with the tab
2:07:51 leading to what we have today
2:07:54 now the policy changes that are being
2:07:57 proposed as part of the plan and i won't
2:07:59 go in too much depth
2:08:00 but i'll explain a little bit of what
2:08:02 the changes are
2:08:04 first is the shift to adopt proactive
2:08:06 safety measures this would move us away
2:08:08 from evaluating
2:08:09 reactive safety statistics in order to
2:08:12 pursue improvements
2:08:13 the second is committing to an
2:08:14 accessible and comfortable multimodal
2:08:16 transportation system which is
2:08:18 similar to our complete streets policy
2:08:20 now but it's
2:08:21 it's in the process to develop the
2:08:23 master plan we provide additional
2:08:25 language
2:08:25 and what this actually means for all
2:08:27 users of the system not just what we're
2:08:29 going to put
2:08:29 on the ground next is we're going to be
2:08:32 looking to adopt context-based design
2:08:35 standards for bicycling and pedestrian
2:08:36 networks
2:08:37 what this means is that we're expanding
2:08:39 the toolset of
2:08:40 how we want to build out our network
2:08:43 which shifts the strategies a bit by
2:08:45 planning more tailored solutions
2:08:47 to fit more specific situations instead
2:08:49 of applying
2:08:50 a one size fits all for all situations
2:08:52 which means that
2:08:53 we're not just going to build a bike
2:08:55 lane everywhere or a four four four or
2:08:57 five foot sidewalk everywhere but we're
2:08:59 expanding the solutions
2:09:00 to be a little more tailored
2:09:03 next is the commitment to coordinating
2:09:05 our land use a little bit closer with
2:09:07 transit well
2:09:08 we have similar policies in place now
2:09:10 that coordinate these two items
2:09:12 the language we're applying now
2:09:13 recognize that in order to have
2:09:14 successful transit network
2:09:16 we have to tailor a little more of our
2:09:18 land use to better support the transit
2:09:20 service
2:09:20 we actually want and not so much what
2:09:23 metro or sound transit is willing to
2:09:24 provide us
2:09:26 next is the investment in intelligent
2:09:28 transportation systems this is
2:09:30 a bit of a pre-existing policy but we're
2:09:32 expanding the language
2:09:34 in the master plan to
2:09:38 improve or to encompass the improvement
2:09:41 of crossing safety as part of the
2:09:43 systems
2:09:44 in addition to the balancing of traffic
2:09:45 12 through intersections
2:09:48 and the uh and the other part is that
2:09:50 this policy
2:09:51 is to increase access for affordable
2:09:53 transportation options this policy
2:09:55 acknowledges that not only everyone can
2:09:57 afford to maintain the high cost of car
2:09:59 ownership
2:10:00 and there are more affordable options
2:10:02 that we can make available to more of
2:10:04 the community
2:10:06 lastly we are wanting to invest more in
2:10:08 parking management strategies
2:10:10 to better manage our parking demand in
2:10:13 the growing city
2:10:14 particularly in the commercial areas and
2:10:15 this shift is prior
2:10:17 is to prioritize efficiency improvements
2:10:19 before
2:10:20 pursuing increases in capacity um
2:10:23 this is consistent with the
2:10:24 recommendations that came out of the
2:10:25 recent parking study that was completed
2:10:27 by staff last year
2:10:33 now for implementation for the remainder
2:10:35 of 2020 staff will continue with
2:10:38 continue the mobility master plan
2:10:39 through the comp plan update
2:10:41 and proceed with a couple policy updates
2:10:43 that have been underway uh parallel to
2:10:45 master plan development process
2:10:48 additionally we're going to be getting
2:10:49 our staff
2:10:50 our team fully staffed to support a lot
2:10:51 of this work
2:10:53 in 2021 we'll be updating additional
2:10:55 policies and standards
2:10:56 and begin the process to incorporate the
2:10:58 match plan into the capital improvement
2:11:00 plan and the city budget
2:11:02 in 2022 we'll continue the conversations
2:11:04 to update the project list
2:11:06 with the hopes that we'll be in a better
2:11:08 state financially to propose a smaller
2:11:10 capital project program
2:11:12 which will look at implementing
2:11:13 neighborhood safety improvements
2:11:18 as you all know due to covet 19 pandemic
2:11:21 will need to update a lot of the
2:11:23 assumptions that are in the master plan
2:11:24 as well as a lot of other city plans
2:11:26 but first foremost there's the impact on
2:11:29 our community and travel behavior
2:11:31 this is an issue that we'll continue to
2:11:33 evaluate over the next year to determine
2:11:35 how we want to make adjustments in the
2:11:37 master plan but the guiding principles
2:11:39 and the goals and policies
2:11:42 as we've discussed with the
2:11:43 transportation advisory board still
2:11:45 stand
2:11:45 there's there's a little more dependence
2:11:47 on teleworking there's
2:11:48 a higher acceptance on flexible
2:11:50 scheduling and
2:11:52 how people are commuting and getting
2:11:54 around to access jobs or
2:11:56 resources and there's significant
2:11:58 changes to school traffic demands
2:12:00 so we're going to be looking at a lot of
2:12:02 that to make to to evaluate how we want
2:12:04 to change our project list
2:12:06 additionally there's impacts on a
2:12:07 transit use as well as routing and so
2:12:10 we'll be need to
2:12:11 evaluate that in partnership with our
2:12:13 transit agencies
2:12:14 to figure out where adjustments are
2:12:16 going to be made and how we're going to
2:12:17 be looking at expanding services in the
2:12:19 future
2:12:22 and lastly there's the impacts on human
2:12:24 services through this pandemic and
2:12:26 and this is really brought to light the
2:12:29 inability
2:12:30 for everyone to access transit as it
2:12:33 stands now
2:12:35 let alone to access transit when it's
2:12:37 cut found in services
2:12:39 so we're going to be trying to explore
2:12:40 different ideas with our transit
2:12:42 agencies to
2:12:43 make sure that we are maintaining if not
2:12:46 improving some of that access
2:12:50 now additionally you if you
2:12:53 were able to look through the plan you
2:12:55 noticed that there were several uh
2:12:57 notes that's to indicate that this is
2:12:59 we're
2:13:00 taking on ongoing edits for the mobility
2:13:02 master plan and
2:13:04 while there's a lot of formatting or
2:13:06 organizational edits i won't
2:13:08 go over i'll highlight at least the
2:13:10 major changes that were
2:13:12 that are still ongoing we're providing
2:13:15 clarifying language in coordination with
2:13:17 land use policies
2:13:18 for providing additional language
2:13:20 related to the transportation demand
2:13:22 management which will be very similar to
2:13:23 what they were before
2:13:25 and we're going to be clarifying
2:13:27 language around climate change and i'm
2:13:28 working with my colleague megan to make
2:13:30 sure that
2:13:31 it's consistent with a lot of her work
2:13:33 but also with
2:13:34 what the city goals are additionally
2:13:37 we're completing the final check to make
2:13:38 sure that
2:13:39 the chest that the mobility master plan
2:13:41 is meeting
2:13:42 the growth management requirements and
2:13:44 is consistent with regional
2:13:46 uh project plans
2:13:50 next steps this is going to be going to
2:13:52 city council on september 8th
2:13:55 you're familiar with the comp plan
2:13:56 process so i'm not going to read through
2:13:58 it all but
2:13:59 as part of the current process what i
2:14:01 wanted to do was
2:14:03 in preparation for the september 8th
2:14:04 city council meeting i want to ask if it
2:14:06 was possible to receive a letter of
2:14:08 support
2:14:08 from the commission because i think it
2:14:10 would be helpful for council to hear
2:14:12 from other groups on
2:14:13 how transportation impacts other areas
2:14:16 of interest
2:14:17 and how the mobility match plan help or
2:14:19 doesn't help with some of that work
2:14:24 so that is what i have for you tonight
2:14:27 can i help yes answer any questions yeah
2:14:31 so um looking at that uh the list of
2:14:34 time table um are you looking for the
2:14:39 council to approve this on september the
2:14:44 they're they're going to be endorsing
2:14:46 the plan uh so that can
2:14:47 continue on in the comp plan process so
2:14:50 it's not a full adoption
2:14:51 on september 8th so uh since we haven't
2:14:55 had a really
2:14:57 opportunity to uh discuss
2:15:01 what or ask questions like we would
2:15:03 normally do considering the fact that it
2:15:05 was two and a half hours to
2:15:06 talk about the environmental commission
2:15:09 i'm sure that
2:15:10 the commissioners have a lot of and i do
2:15:13 two questions to be asked
2:15:14 and i don't think that one meeting
2:15:18 is going to be enough to address this so
2:15:20 is there any way i don't know
2:15:22 uh if it's possible we have two more
2:15:25 meetings in october in
2:15:26 september uh would it be
2:15:30 possible to uh divide up
2:15:34 the um the work of
2:15:39 this mobility plan
2:15:42 and have a short amount of time on each
2:15:45 one of those meetings to discuss
2:15:47 at least part of
2:15:51 of the things that you're proposing
2:15:55 i'm gonna the answer from me is gonna be
2:15:58 yes but i'm gonna defer to kristen on
2:15:59 the scheduling
2:16:00 i'm looking at her but she can't see
2:16:02 that i'm looking directly at her so i
2:16:04 because i am looking whoops
2:16:13 sorry it's because i was looking at the
2:16:14 schedule um
2:16:16 and we absolutely can fit it in and
2:16:21 my schedule's gone let's see
2:16:26 we actually can we'll fit it in
2:16:32 yes um let me work with stephen
2:16:36 and we'll figure this out our public
2:16:38 hearing
2:16:40 for this we have two public hearings
2:16:42 one's on the 24th one is on
2:16:44 october 8th so we can
2:16:48 maybe do the 10th and the 24th of
2:16:50 september but i'll confirm that
2:16:52 okay i just i i know that there's going
2:16:54 to be a lot of questions and
2:16:56 and one meeting is just not going to be
2:16:57 enough but i don't want to take
2:16:59 questions on the whole thing if we could
2:17:01 divide it up it would make a little bit
2:17:03 more sense so we can
2:17:04 you know actually spend time on
2:17:07 a smaller portion of it
2:17:11 so um thank you stephen yes absolutely
2:17:15 um it was very concise and i know that
2:17:17 you put a lot of work into it i know the
2:17:19 transportation
2:17:21 commission committee commission has done
2:17:25 many hours putting this together and
2:17:26 it's not perfect you know
2:17:28 but we're going to see what we can make
2:17:31 at least a few changes to
2:17:33 add some of our thoughts and comments on
2:17:37 um i know it's late but
2:17:40 uh kristen should i open it up to
2:17:42 audience comments
2:17:45 yes please okay at this time
2:17:49 if there is anybody in the
2:17:52 audience that would make like to make a
2:17:55 comment
2:17:55 understanding that we are going to have
2:17:57 at least three more meetings
2:17:59 on on this particular thing with a
2:18:03 update from stephen about
2:18:07 uh what is specifically in the
2:18:10 uh program so
2:18:14 is there anybody that would like to make
2:18:16 a comment
2:18:20 is there anybody who would like to make
2:18:22 a comment
2:18:25 i see uh one call-in user
2:18:30 that came in during the middle of the
2:18:32 presentation i
2:18:33 am not sure who that is the first six
2:18:37 digits
2:18:38 are connie's number so i'm going to
2:18:39 assume that it is her but i am not
2:18:41 positive
2:18:44 connie would you like to make a comment
2:18:53 connie if that's you you have to get
2:19:02 you guys have me muted i i just took you
2:19:05 off i'm sorry
2:19:06 okay i'm sitting i'm trying to make a
2:19:08 comment it's just you can't hear me now
2:19:10 you can though i'm sure yes
2:19:12 yes god okay so
2:19:15 yes i have read this whole document
2:19:18 three times now right
2:19:20 because i love a good document but
2:19:23 there's nothing that makes me crazier
2:19:25 than a document that does not
2:19:26 make sense to me within the context of
2:19:29 all of the plans that we have
2:19:31 because yet again it does not mesh
2:19:34 so i went and talked to several of the
2:19:38 tab group and they spent a lot of time
2:19:41 on the guiding principles
2:19:43 and really for the guiding principles i
2:19:46 like them there's only one that i think
2:19:48 that is missing and
2:19:49 and somehow impacts to the community or
2:19:51 community engagement or bringing the
2:19:54 public along
2:19:54 so that we actually have the community
2:19:57 wanting the same
2:19:58 thing to happen is missing so
2:20:02 i was uh heavily engaged when the
2:20:06 park strategic plan came through
2:20:09 planning policy commission
2:20:11 and what they did is they created a
2:20:14 replacement
2:20:15 portion that was complete for
2:20:18 the comprehensive plan what is in this
2:20:22 document right now
2:20:23 is sort of uh we want to change
2:20:27 these policies but we're going to keep
2:20:29 the transportation policies
2:20:32 and i i think they actually conflict
2:20:35 with one another
2:20:37 so what i would like to see coming
2:20:38 forward is a standalone
2:20:41 these will be the new transportation
2:20:44 policies this will be the new chapter we
2:20:48 don't have to guess what the language is
2:20:50 we know what you're going to say
2:20:53 because right now i have no
2:20:57 idea i don't see how concurrency
2:21:00 works i see that you want to make it
2:21:03 more multimodal and then
2:21:05 here's the elephant in the living room
2:21:08 we don't talk about congestion
2:21:10 and you know most of the world of
2:21:12 issaquah actually
2:21:13 is interested in the topic of congestion
2:21:18 and it's a big concern to them i have
2:21:21 drunk the zombie coffee and i don't
2:21:23 think you can
2:21:23 build more roads to make people be able
2:21:27 to get into their single occupancy
2:21:29 vehicles
2:21:29 like to me is not going to be successful
2:21:33 but i would say 50 of this town
2:21:36 wants to be able to get in their car and
2:21:38 drive faster
2:21:40 so where is the community conversation
2:21:43 or or engagement or education that is
2:21:48 actually going to
2:21:49 make people think that this document is
2:21:51 going to get
2:21:52 them a better quality of life so that's
2:21:56 a big one now here's a tiny one
2:21:58 you use words like quality of life but
2:22:01 there's no definition
2:22:02 section there's nothing saying
2:22:05 where those words come from is it
2:22:08 comprehensive plan definitions i have no
2:22:11 and without a definition section i am
2:22:13 further confused and don't know what
2:22:15 you're talking about
2:22:16 so well i do admire a 238-page document
2:22:20 that i think
2:22:21 should be maybe 75 pages
2:22:24 uh maximum with the appendices um
2:22:27 this one has a long way to go and i
2:22:29 frankly don't
2:22:30 again know what the hurry is during a
2:22:32 pandemic right
2:22:35 the tab is perfectly happy moseying
2:22:38 along
2:22:38 they feel appreciated so again i would
2:22:41 delay this one
2:22:42 until it can be far better i don't see
2:22:46 the hurry
2:22:47 thank you very much bye
2:22:50 just to follow up on that i don't see
2:22:52 the real hurry
2:22:54 but i think that uh ppc should have the
2:22:58 opportunity
2:22:58 to make comments to try to make it
2:23:01 better
2:23:02 so i still would like to uh continue
2:23:05 further discussion on this um
2:23:08 as you know dividing it and
2:23:11 bringing it back uh for further comments
2:23:15 so we can take the itty the
2:23:18 smaller parts and try to make it better
2:23:20 so if that's
2:23:21 an agreement with the rest of the
2:23:23 commission
2:23:26 do you have any anything else to say on
2:23:29 that particular subject
2:23:32 um i'll ask one more time is there
2:23:34 anybody else that wants to make an
2:23:36 audience comment
2:23:42 hearing none i don't i don't have it i
2:23:45 don't
2:23:46 see any um okay just need to make sure i
2:23:50 have to ask
2:23:51 uh and since there being no further
2:23:54 business before the commission
2:23:56 um i am going to adjourn the meeting at
2:24:03 6 because i'm following what is on
2:24:09 my script and not what i
2:24:12 would say normally 8 56
2:24:16 850 that is 850 you know
2:24:19 i'm not ready to go women have my
2:24:20 glasses on it seems like 9.56 but it is
2:24:26 yes it does so with that um
2:24:29 we are adjourned

Attendance

Council / Members (12)
Administration/Staff: Joan Probala
Christen Leeson
Senior Planner Ron Faul
Megan Curtis-Murphy
Sustain. Coord. Joy Lewis Stephen Padua
Sr. Transp. Planner Bill Rinehart Doug Yormick
Assistant Planner Janice Carle Keith Niven
Director
Planning & Jason Voiss Community Development Robin Beukers
Alternate (voting) Wally Bobkiewicz
City Administrator PROBALA
Chair, called the meeting to order at 6:32 PM. She explained that, due to the Governor’s Proclamation 20-28 prohibiting meetings that fall under the Open Public Meetings Act