← Back to City Council Digest

Planning Policy Commission Auto captions

Thursday, August 27, 2020

6:30 PM · 1h 12m
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 – Vacant 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 August 13, 2020
packet pp.5–11
Staff report:
APPROVAL OF MINUTES a) 08-13-20 Planning Policy Commission Minutes Page [0000]
4. OTHER BUSINESS / ANNOUNCEMENTS
4a
Upcoming Schedule Discussion
Christen Leeson, Senior Planner · packet pp.41
Staff report:
• Schedule
0:04 zoom call
0:06 and i know that the commissioners know
0:08 the drill
0:11 questions and comments in the chat and
0:14 introduce yourself every time for some
0:16 reason that seems to be a
0:18 requirement if anybody is calling in
0:23 the information is online so you should
0:26 be able to get in very easily
0:27 and your number will come up and we'll
0:32 give a shout out to you as soon as we
0:35 have our presentation tonight
0:36 we will have a community outreach
0:41 if you want to call it that so that we
0:43 can bring in anybody who's interested in
0:45 making any comments tonight
0:47 has their opportunity to do that so
0:50 um first of all i think it
0:54 will be gus are you going to take the
0:56 role
1:01 i'm sorry joe and i was typing i did not
1:02 hear what you said
1:06 are you going to take the role um
1:09 i i'm not i'm just gonna make kristin
1:12 the host and i need to go back to a
1:13 council meeting i just was gonna open
1:15 the meeting for you folks
1:17 so we'll miss you so kristen will you
1:20 take the role
1:21 i will i was just being told i was going
1:22 to take the role so
1:24 um let's see um jason voice
1:30 here joy lewis
1:33 here ron fall
1:36 president janice carl
1:40 here tonight thanks uh joan probably
1:44 here and then we also have
1:48 present um doug yormick
1:52 from staff kristen leeson keith niven
1:55 uh jyn davis hayes and susan lowe is
1:58 here as well
2:01 and robin bukers is excused tonight
2:05 so the next thing on our agenda is the
2:08 approval of the minutes do i have
2:10 uh for the minutes of august the 13th so
2:13 i have
2:14 any objections for passing approving the
2:17 minutes
2:21 hearing them the minutes are approved
2:23 tonight we're going to talk
2:25 a little bit about our favorite subject
2:28 the comprehensive plan there are three
2:30 possible reasons that
2:34 are possible in our city and kristin's
2:36 going to give us an update on
2:37 exactly what they are and give us an
2:40 idea of what we should do
2:42 so kristin please take it away
2:46 hey can you hear me yes
2:49 okay
2:53 can you hear me yes okay thank you this
2:56 is kristin leeson
2:58 senior planner with the community
2:59 planning and development department
3:01 trying to make there we go and you can
3:03 see my screen
3:04 yes okay good to go so yes tonight we're
3:08 going to talk about the
3:10 proposed redesignations and rezones and
3:12 for the first time in a long time we do
3:14 not have a reason request to be
3:16 community facilities
3:19 um just as a refresher
3:22 we have two different types of reasons
3:23 one is a type a request
3:25 is consistent with the comprehensive
3:27 plan land use designation so somebody
3:29 wants to go from
3:30 single family suburban to single family
3:33 small lot those both fall in
3:34 low density residential in this case
3:38 this is a type b none of the requested
3:41 rezones
3:42 are consistent with the comprehensive
3:44 plants they all require comprehensive
3:45 plant amendments so they follow that
3:47 same process
3:48 along with the comp plan
3:52 the first one that we're looking to
3:53 looking at tonight is called
3:55 or it's we're calling it legacy
3:56 landscaping it's located on the north
3:59 southwest
4:00 corner of newport way and sr 900 there
4:02 in red
4:04 it is about it's a little under an acre
4:07 there is currently a landscaping
4:10 office or contractor there on site and
4:13 it's been commercial for a very long
4:15 time
4:15 um the
4:19 existing land u or land use designation
4:22 is low density residential
4:23 the property owner is requesting
4:24 commercial or mixed use
4:26 the existing zoning is single-family
4:28 suburban and the property owner is
4:30 requesting again commercial or mixed use
4:33 as you can see to the north is actually
4:35 central isoqua to the north and
4:37 northeast and you have
4:39 urban core zoning and then there's the
4:40 rally development agreement
4:42 to the north and northeast to the west
4:44 is single-family suburban and that's
4:46 actually the bergsma property that was
4:48 purchased last year
4:50 to eventually become mostly i believe
4:53 um open space but somewhere potentially
4:56 recreational space as well and then
4:58 single-family suburban to the south and
4:59 the talus is further south of that
5:02 um and single-family estates actually to
5:03 the south and the town is south of that
5:06 over to the southeast is the tibbetts
5:08 valley park
5:13 so some of the that he wasn't specific
5:15 on which
5:16 types of zoning that he would like so we
5:18 looked at a couple of different ones
5:20 um currently as i said it's
5:21 single-family suburban and the property
5:24 owner can go up to 30 feet high can have
5:27 impervious surface 60 percent impervious
5:31 and um there we go
5:34 oh i should mention too that currently
5:36 this use that's on the property
5:39 is legally non-conforming so that means
5:42 that
5:43 this property was permitted back in the
5:46 70s i believe
5:47 i don't have it right it was they were
5:48 permitted back in the 70s as
5:50 a gas station and then a landscaper
5:53 moved in
5:54 it was done through a pua which is a
5:56 property use agreement
5:58 and then eventually once we adopted our
6:02 now land use code the property use
6:04 agreement and the retail designation
6:05 that it was given went away
6:07 and it made it to the family suburban
6:10 so that is how the shoes wound up there
6:12 in the first place
6:14 um with the two use of the two zones we
6:17 were looking at were mixed use
6:18 and urban core so i'm going to skip over
6:21 urban core really quick or go over that
6:22 one really quickly
6:24 uh to do urban core would be kind of
6:25 difficult urban core is a
6:27 it's inside central isoquad it's a
6:29 centralistic quasome and it might mean
6:31 creating either a new zone for urban
6:33 core or
6:37 bringing this air or changing the
6:38 boundary of central issaquah which i
6:40 don't think is something that we want to
6:41 do right now
6:43 um and it's also more dense than mixed
6:46 use
6:46 if we were to do mixed use it has
6:50 90 impervious um
6:53 the base building height is 48 feet as
6:56 opposed to 60 feet for
6:58 urban core and the max building height
7:00 is 65 feet opposed to 125 feet per urban
7:03 porch so if we were to
7:04 zone it um that is what we would propose
7:06 to do
7:08 um these are the uses that are allowed
7:10 they're essentially the same they're
7:11 listed differently
7:12 um in the centralisify
7:15 standards as opposed to the land use
7:18 code that we have but they're very much
7:20 they're very similar to each other
7:21 uses that are allowed um the pros in
7:25 rezoning this
7:26 um it would bring the property into
7:28 conformance so if it's legally
7:30 non-conforming it cannot expand
7:33 its use um the property owner
7:37 so rezoning it would bring it into
7:39 conformance would allow
7:40 the property owner an expansion of the
7:42 existing use and then it allow a variety
7:44 of potential uses and it also makes the
7:46 property easier to sell in the future
7:48 and the cons pretty much negate every
7:51 one of those so cons if you don't
7:52 re-zone it it remains legally
7:54 non-conforming the property owner cannot
7:56 expand
7:57 and the property remains legally
7:59 non-conforming and is difficult to sell
8:01 so something that we like to do is to
8:03 see all properties be
8:05 conforming so our recommendation right
8:08 now
8:08 is to rezone the property to mix use so
8:12 if you all would like to stop
8:13 and chat here we can or i can move on to
8:16 the next one
8:20 what's your choice
8:24 i like to each one as we go through them
8:26 because that'll make it easy
8:28 yeah i think that's taking a bite at
8:29 each one as we move
8:31 okay be helpful okay
8:38 kristen i apologize for interrupting you
8:41 before
8:41 you start again i just wanted to share
8:43 that would you mind changing the host
8:45 role to doug
8:46 because uh he has a paid license and
8:49 that way
8:50 if i drop off it won't drop your call
8:52 before you cut me off i wanted to before
8:54 you had to leave i wanted to tell you
8:55 that i am not trained to be a host
8:57 so no that's yeah we're on the same page
8:59 so if you just right click on that's
9:01 name and
9:02 change role to host that will continue
9:04 this meeting as
9:05 is okay
9:08 um apologize everybody we're just trying
9:11 to deal with some technical issues here
9:13 so kristin are you the are you the one
9:15 that's gonna work
9:16 uh follow the chat room no doug is
9:20 i hang on i'm trying to expand my
9:23 site because i shared my screen should i
9:26 unshare my screen to be able to see
9:27 yes please that's the best way to do it
9:29 that's how i do it okay
9:31 and then if you click on participants
9:32 and then you'll see doug
9:38 yeah when you right click on it right on
9:40 top it'll say change role
9:42 okay i just can't get it big right now
9:44 it's still small let's see
9:48 here we go i should do it let's see
9:51 okay and i right click on doug and say
9:53 change role yep and say host
9:55 and it should search for
10:02 nope
10:10 it's not working
10:20 that's okay if it doesn't work kristen
10:22 then i'm going to stay here with you
10:23 please continue
10:24 and i will um i'll let tisha know that
10:26 i'm going to be here for the direction
10:27 of the meeting no problem
10:28 thanks all right so what is everybody
10:32 seeing right now
10:35 nothing okay here we go here we go okay
10:39 sorry about that so i the only concern
10:43 that i have
10:44 is the property um that is exactly
10:47 south east of it is a single family
10:50 resident
10:51 and what is their feeling about that
10:56 otherwise i don't have any i don't
10:58 really don't have any
10:59 qualms about it i don't know
11:03 what the feeling is about it i do know
11:05 that the property
11:06 this property owner of the legacy
11:08 property and two other property owners
11:11 have um a shared driveway agreement it
11:14 happened
11:19 i'm having difficulties i'm sorry
11:22 there we go the property agreement
11:26 they so the city vacated this the
11:28 driveway
11:30 hit there that looks like the little
11:31 tail back in 2001
11:33 and the current the legacy property
11:35 owner the property owner to the
11:36 southeast and one other property owner
11:38 have a joint agreement
11:40 um the legacy property owner is required
11:43 to maintain it's a bridge
11:45 and it's an access for three of those
11:46 properties it's a bridge
11:48 and the legacy owner must maintain that
11:51 bridge and the access off of sr9 off of
11:54 um newport way there but otherwise
11:58 you know we were made aware of that by
12:00 another we already knew about it but we
12:01 were made aware of it
12:02 again by the adjacent property owner but
12:05 i haven't heard anything about the
12:06 reason
12:08 okay um she has one of them she has been
12:11 sent
12:12 all of the and she's been sent the
12:13 agenda in all meeting notices
12:17 okay yeah and then the
12:20 the fact that it's going from 40 was it
12:24 40 percent previous service to 90
12:27 impervious service
12:29 but that property is has other
12:31 environmental impacts so they would
12:33 never be able to get to the 90
12:35 impervious surface is that correct
12:37 correct
12:40 do we know what how much how close they
12:43 would get to that
12:46 no i don't
12:52 so would they have to do an
12:54 environmental study or something before
12:56 they actually
12:58 yes and i know that keith niven is on
13:00 the
13:01 call here and he may be able to answer
13:03 some of the current planning questions
13:05 and development questions better than i
13:06 can
13:10 but yes they have you know with every
13:12 review there's and i believe there's
13:13 nine
13:14 environmental impact statement um go
13:16 ahead keith
13:18 so can you guys hear me this is keith
13:20 nevin director of beauty planning and
13:21 development
13:23 um so the answer is there's there's two
13:26 ways
13:27 if this property is rezoned what could
13:29 happen
13:30 is either an expansion so that just
13:32 might be something small there's really
13:34 not
13:34 a lot of extra room on the property if
13:37 you
13:38 if you've driven by it there's a
13:41 building in a fenced in yard
13:43 uh which is where they keep their which
13:45 is where they keep their trucks
13:47 um and so you know i think what you're
13:50 asking
13:51 uh commissioner is really what would a
13:53 redevelopment
13:54 project look like um and so
13:57 you know the zoning code the zoning
14:00 standards that would be
14:01 associated with mixed use are are
14:04 maximums
14:05 and so as as you talk about things like
14:07 impervious surface limits
14:10 um they could get up to the limit
14:12 assuming
14:13 you could actually do that on the
14:14 property so things like
14:16 uh tibbetts creek runs through the
14:18 corner kind of where the tail is
14:20 um that's you know the back part of the
14:23 property which would be like the
14:24 southwest
14:25 portion that's all hillside going up um
14:28 cougar
14:29 so you know the reality is as kristen
14:32 mentioned earlier
14:33 even even if even if they bulldoze the
14:36 existing site
14:37 and put something else there an
14:39 impervious surface
14:41 perspective uh you probably can't get
14:43 much more than what's there now because
14:45 the entire
14:46 usable flat part of the site is paved
14:49 it's either got a building on it or it's
14:51 got a
14:53 yard okay so assuming
14:56 redevelopment at some point in the
14:59 future
15:00 if we re-zone this would they have the
15:02 ability to
15:04 go in and wipe out the hillside
15:07 abatement
15:09 and put in a new abutment so the
15:12 hillside
15:12 is considered a critical area if it's
15:15 above 40 percent
15:16 slow which has um
15:20 a buffer at the bottom um and
15:24 you know the the critical area code
15:27 does allow you to potentially reduce
15:31 that buffer on the bottom
15:32 but it's all based on geotech stability
15:36 and studies that go with that um
15:39 so you know so
15:42 if you're if your question is is there a
15:45 likelihood that
15:46 all of a sudden they cut out 20 feet of
15:49 the hillside
15:50 and build a 40-foot retaining wall
15:53 because you have to like
15:54 you're chasing slope on your way up
15:56 right um
15:58 no that's not going to happen
16:01 okay we're going to go to a comment from
16:03 commissioner lewis
16:08 thank you joan this is a commissioner
16:10 joy lewis i was curious about the
16:12 properties to the south
16:14 um i appreciated in my conversation with
16:16 staff this last week um
16:18 talking about the history of this
16:19 property when we originally
16:22 when we were working on creating the
16:23 urban core we really purposely tried to
16:26 keep this
16:27 very tight and reined in and um
16:30 well right now i think mixed use is a
16:32 really um
16:33 good designation for this property i'm
16:36 curious you know we start to see the
16:37 parcels start to get bigger
16:39 um right now it's my understanding that
16:40 there's homes right there
16:42 and i'm curious you know we really have
16:44 to be willing to say
16:46 if the situation changes to the south
16:48 how far do we want it to reach um
16:50 and so at this point how would staff
16:52 feel about this giant chunk um
16:54 kristen's map is a little hard for me to
16:56 read but basically to the next major
16:58 road if that all became mixed use
17:00 um how does the city feel about that
17:03 kind of
17:04 a wave of expansion possibly happening
17:06 over time as land values change and as
17:09 obviously as urban core uh maybe picks
17:12 um having having more um more space i'm
17:15 kind of curious to see how you guys feel
17:16 about that
17:20 so immediately to
17:23 the
17:26 north well as you know as i mentioned
17:29 immediately to the west and northwest is
17:31 bergsmont the berksman property which is
17:33 going to be permanent open space
17:34 and or recreation um to the southwest of
17:37 that is harvey manning park
17:40 i believe um yes also
17:43 permanent um open space or recreation
17:47 um a little further south you start to
17:48 hit hit tibbetts creek
17:50 part of that area has been developed
17:52 already as
17:54 um single family
17:57 oh wait i'm it's further south than that
18:00 there's
18:00 you know with the steep slopes in there
18:03 yeah so kristen
18:04 if if i can so
18:08 the road the road that shows up at the
18:10 bottom of the map
18:12 that's james bush road okay the bottom
18:16 portion of james bush road so on this
18:18 map
18:19 consider about the first inch um once
18:22 you get west of 900
18:24 that's a 22 slope
18:28 so as you look at these houses that are
18:31 south of legacy landscaping
18:33 they are up a hill they really don't
18:36 they're you know some of these
18:38 closer to james bush are actually on
18:40 there's the front ones are on sr 900 but
18:42 the ones
18:43 immediately south of legacy are
18:46 up a hill um so so as you talk about
18:50 whether or not this zoning action would
18:53 lead to
18:54 uh kind of a sprawl say of commercial
18:58 down sr 900 um from an access
19:01 standpoint and a topography standpoint
19:03 there's probably a natural barrier there
19:06 for that
19:06 um so i i you know at least today
19:10 i wouldn't see that as being a likely
19:13 candidate for
19:15 an extension of other non-residential
19:17 donors
19:20 thank you that's very helpful
19:24 are there any more questions or comments
19:31 should we go on to that we have a
19:32 comment from from commissioner jason
19:35 boyce snuck in there
19:40 hello this is commissioner boyce and
19:42 just real quickly
19:43 um is there a and again this is all
19:47 the as far as the historical and the
19:49 clarification it makes sense this
19:51 was zoned quite differently in the 70s
19:54 gas station so it kind of seems odd to
19:58 that it was missed but is there some
20:01 type of
20:02 exemption or special permit that could
20:05 be made
20:06 for this particular property or simply
20:08 easier to rezone this particular parcel
20:12 no no nothing in place
20:17 is that allowable as far as like a
20:20 special permit for this particular
20:22 parcel or that
20:24 just not something the city typically
20:25 does it'd be easier just to rezone this
20:27 parcel
20:28 not it's easier to rezone this parcel
20:31 okay
20:31 fair enough yeah and that's and doing
20:34 something
20:34 to allow just this property is not
20:36 exactly what property owner is looking
20:38 for either he's like you know what
20:40 what can i do so
20:43 that that wasn't the request um so
20:46 rezoning is
20:46 right rezoning is the best option yeah
20:51 all right thank you i don't ever
20:54 remember seeing a gas station there
20:59 that's a long time ago yeah
21:03 are we ready to move on or there are
21:05 more questions
21:06 there's nothing in the chat room so okay
21:09 i'm sorry i'm having a funny time with
21:11 my screen let me
21:12 rearrange some things really quickly so
21:14 i can see their presentation okay
21:20 okay trailhead and really
21:24 this is kind of called trailhead but
21:25 it's also called centurylink because
21:27 trailhead would not go here
21:28 centurylink would so um but i'm just
21:31 just
21:32 for the sake of identification we're
21:34 calling a trailhead tonight
21:36 um this is located over
21:39 near the city city shop excuse me the
21:41 city shop site
21:43 and down the slope from mysql highlands
21:46 it is adjacent to i-90 it is actually
21:49 two parcels one
21:50 is just about an acre and the other one
21:52 is just over six acres so seven acres
21:54 total and only about four of those acres
21:56 would be rezoned
21:58 on the site currently is an rv park part
22:02 the rv park would be displaced but the
22:04 city is talking with adjacent owners
22:06 about potentially relocating some of the
22:08 rv park there
22:10 the existing land use is community
22:12 facilities
22:13 and it's proposed for commercial
22:16 and the existing zoning is community
22:19 facilities facilities and the proposed
22:21 zoning is intensive commercial and
22:25 we have a john deere sales site just to
22:28 the west of it and i-90 to the west of
22:31 um most of it around here is vacant land
22:33 in the area
22:34 in general is either is primarily
22:37 intensive
22:37 intensive commercial with some community
22:39 facilities in there as well
22:42 and and the idea for those who don't
22:46 know
22:46 the idea is that centurylink is
22:49 currently over
22:50 located over off between maple and
22:52 newport and sr 900
22:54 next to our transit center the proposal
22:56 is to
22:57 relocate that operation site it's a
23:01 it's a storage garage and an operations
23:03 center and the proposal is to relocate
23:05 that to this site and they're about the
23:07 same the existing sites four acres and
23:08 this would be four acres
23:11 and then on the site the where this was
23:15 put housing about 360 units 175 of which
23:19 would be affordable units and also some
23:21 community
23:22 services down there as well and that is
23:24 the reason for this
23:25 request that the city is actually making
23:29 oh i went through the surrounding uses
23:32 [Music]
23:33 proposed standards so right now the
23:35 community facility standards
23:38 they have to be consistent with the most
23:41 restrictive adjacent zoning which in
23:43 this case is
23:44 intensive commercial so an intensive
23:47 commercial allows for
23:48 90 percent impervious ten percent
23:51 pervious a forty foot base and a sixty
23:53 five foot
23:53 maximum height
24:00 intensive commercial um obviously allows
24:03 it doesn't allow single-family housing
24:05 there but it does allow for botanical
24:07 gardens funeral homes essential public
24:09 facilities
24:10 outdoor recreation food and beverage
24:12 hotels industrial intensive commercial
24:15 medical office office and professional
24:18 retail and service
24:22 so some of the pros of rezoning this is
24:24 it allows for
24:25 the relocation of centurylink so that we
24:27 can build a 360 units on the other site
24:30 and this site is actually more
24:34 appropriate for the storage garage
24:37 and operation center than its existing
24:41 site in the urban core
24:42 and cons as i mentioned before a portion
24:44 of the rv park would be displaced but we
24:46 are working on finding a way to relocate
24:48 it so
24:49 our recommendation would be to re-zone
24:52 uh the the site central link site
24:56 site to intensive commercial y'all have
24:59 any questions
25:02 this is this is the housing unit that we
25:06 have talked about
25:07 what two years ago where it was kind of
25:10 public private uh exactly
25:15 exactly and jen davis hayes is here
25:17 tonight too to answer any questions that
25:19 and jen davis hayes has expressed
25:22 uh wanting to comment
25:26 hi thanks kristen that was a great job
25:28 of describing somebody else's project i
25:30 know it's always challenging when
25:31 they're sitting by
25:32 i just wanted to mention the one thing
25:34 that is a little different from the time
25:36 um submitted this application many moons
25:38 ago
25:39 is that the actual amount of acreage
25:41 that we are looking to
25:42 um to rezone or to
25:46 change the zoning actually may be
25:47 smaller than four acres because we're
25:48 trying to
25:49 really work we're working with
25:51 centurylink to determine how much space
25:53 they
25:53 actually need and we may be close to
25:56 more like two and a half acres
25:58 um so we'll of course um you know work
26:01 with you to have the exact amount and
26:03 all those
26:03 that good stuff i just wanted to let the
26:05 commissioners know that it's a smaller
26:07 portion
26:08 um and that um the rv park
26:11 that you mentioned that we will they
26:14 plan right now is to have
26:15 some uh addition some sites still
26:17 remaining
26:18 um and and potentially look at it's not
26:22 it's not a prop a private property owner
26:24 to the adjacent property it's a city who
26:26 owns the property
26:27 to see if it makes sense uh expanding
26:29 the rv park right that is something that
26:31 again
26:32 uh we need to do a bunch of more studies
26:34 et cetera but we are very aware how
26:36 important that
26:37 aspect is
26:44 so how many uh rv places are there
26:49 and do people stay
26:52 for extended amounts of time this is
26:55 their home
26:57 there are about well again this
26:58 information is from
27:00 late last year so it may have changed
27:02 but there are about 20
27:04 there's 56 sites two of the sites are
27:07 mobile are not are a mobile home so
27:09 again different than an rv where they
27:11 are
27:11 they cannot move and about 20 of those
27:16 rv sites are rented monthly and people
27:19 stay there year round
27:21 um and so the other um you know 30 some
27:25 um are are rented out daily weekly and
27:29 it kind of changes there are some people
27:30 that come and
27:32 the owners told us you know of course
27:34 that's you come in to travel to the
27:36 the region um you bring your rv you park
27:38 there
27:39 um enjoy the the area there are some
27:41 people who come and work
27:43 and live out of their rv for six weeks
27:46 stun
27:46 stint at area hospitals
27:49 or other jobs in construction
27:51 [Applause]
27:53 so it's it's a variety of people of uses
28:00 there
28:02 does anybody have a comment or a
28:04 question we have
28:05 the next uh comment is from commissioner
28:08 paul
28:10 why doesn't it come up on my chat
28:14 i don't know i have
28:17 i have a comment from um
28:21 a few comments after that comment as
28:23 well
28:24 i don't know why it's not showing up on
28:25 your chat
28:27 so commissioner uh because uh i went
28:30 first last time i'd like
28:33 to go after jason
28:36 let them go first
28:45 if i heard that correctly i'm just going
28:47 to jump in here
28:48 so this is commissioner voice and mine
28:50 is just a point of clarification
28:52 uh thank you jen thank you kristen both
28:55 great presentation and jen you did
28:57 answer some of my questions so just real
28:59 quickly
29:00 um because the agenda packet so the idea
29:04 is to actually take
29:06 centurylink from its current place move
29:09 it over to this area which is surrounded
29:12 uh intensive commercial and then use the
29:14 place where centurylink
29:16 currently is to put the 360 housing
29:19 units
29:20 do i have that correct that is that and
29:23 that zoning
29:24 is uh urban core um where centurylink is
29:27 currently located so again much
29:28 better suited to a mixed use development
29:31 than
29:32 uh operation site of a of a utility
29:35 yeah makes sense okay thank you
29:38 commissioner phone
29:44 okay so question about the building
29:46 height the max building heights
29:48 on intensive commercial is 60 feet
29:52 is that correct 65 feet 65 feet and
29:55 that's the same
29:56 as commercial
30:01 there is no commercial zone
30:05 mixed use that's the same as mixed use
30:09 uh see i'm looking here at the pdf
30:13 and i see center's use is required
30:17 it says max building height to 65.
30:20 so what's it now 60 all right
30:24 it would still be 65 because it it it
30:27 defaults to the most adjacent and most
30:29 restrictive
30:30 zoning and the adjacent zoning the only
30:32 one the only other one there is
30:33 intensive commercial so
30:34 it's still 65. okay
30:39 uh my next question uh cell phone tower
30:43 how does that how does that play into
30:45 this equation
30:46 just in case they there's a cell phone
30:50 car that goes up
30:52 i'm going to defer to keith niven
30:58 um excuse me um keith niven director
31:02 i need a shorter title director of
31:04 community planning and development
31:06 um so cell towers are allowed in every
31:09 zone
31:10 so whether it stays community facilities
31:13 facilities
31:14 or changes to intensive commercial
31:18 um you know the property owner has the
31:21 ability to negotiate with a cell carrier
31:24 for a tower or a
31:28 small cell at that location
31:34 did that answer your question
31:35 commissioner yep very good thank you
31:38 here's a question from commissioner
31:39 lewis
31:42 commissioner joy lewis here jen i think
31:45 keith had sent you on some questions
31:47 that i had and i was hoping that you
31:48 could address them
31:50 some information about the project
31:53 okay let me uh was that about was it
31:56 about the rv park
31:57 attendance or the i have a i have a lot
32:01 of questions actually that's why it's
32:02 something ahead um
32:04 so i think the best way to kind of
32:05 summarize it to start and see how you
32:07 want to respond is to say that
32:09 um i would love to see a lot more
32:10 transparency on this project
32:12 right now i think there's a lot of
32:14 details that are missing and while you
32:16 guys have obviously done a lot of work
32:17 on this over the last couple years
32:19 i think it's important for the community
32:21 to see what we're giving what we're
32:23 getting
32:24 and it's always hard when the city
32:26 proposes a rezone
32:28 when all the ducks don't feel like
32:30 they're in order so
32:31 when i'm looking at this proposal um
32:33 that we got it says that there's going
32:35 to be an
32:36 acre parcel and then a 6.16 acre parcel
32:39 and now you're telling me that there's
32:40 probably going to be less than two
32:42 i kind of like to know what it is um i'd
32:45 also
32:46 uh i i like the designation as far as
32:49 where
32:50 centurylink's operations inc it makes a
32:52 lot of sense of where it's going to go
32:54 it's a great idea on paper but when you
32:57 actually start looking it's nice to see
32:59 the actual
33:00 details of what's going on so right now
33:03 as i understand it there's these three
33:06 interested parties
33:07 and i'm pretty curious about a developer
33:08 who's coming in and getting a really
33:10 cherry spot of land
33:12 he's going to have a giant commercial
33:14 retail space down below
33:15 and he's going to have the majority of
33:17 units because right now it's 185
33:20 will be at market rate when we're
33:21 getting 175 so i'm curious
33:24 how are those numbers determined because
33:26 he's going to be building
33:28 centurylink a site and then he's going
33:30 to be building a building that he's
33:31 going to own the property that's cr and
33:33 he's going to be owning the building
33:35 i understand that isaqua isn't really in
33:37 the business of being a landowner
33:39 but i don't see this as being a huge win
33:41 for affordable housing um
33:43 for us old-timers that were worked on
33:44 affordable housing years ago
33:46 um we've obviously been frustrated to
33:48 see that there hasn't been any units
33:49 that have been built with all these
33:51 things that we thought were
33:52 incentives but i'm not seeing this as
33:54 being a big win because we talked about
33:56 all kinds of different incentives and
33:58 things we wanted to create
33:59 um so when you talk about you know the
34:02 the affordable housing units being for
34:03 people who live
34:04 um have 30 to 80 percent of the medium
34:08 income of our area
34:09 we talked a lot too about first
34:11 responders years ago
34:12 nurses teachers people who may make 50
34:16 45 000 a year who work and serve our
34:19 community
34:20 but can't afford to live here and so we
34:21 talked about having prioritization
34:23 for our firefighters and their families
34:26 and being able to have different um
34:27 spaces
34:28 um so when i look at this project i
34:31 don't want to start tearing it down
34:32 but um keith directed me to the site
34:35 pardon me that's on
34:36 the city website um and i'm not seeing a
34:39 lot of information that talks about
34:41 the numbers and the decisions that was
34:42 gone into it
34:44 and yes i do have concerns about the rv
34:47 park i understand
34:48 that we haven't included those numbers
34:50 in our affordable housing
34:52 because there is a transient population
34:54 that happens and comes and goes from it
34:56 but when i was communicating with staff
34:58 this week keith was estimating um right
35:00 now again
35:01 the numbers are soft that 30 percent of
35:04 the rv park would remain and i have
35:05 concerns about that i think it's
35:07 important that we protect
35:08 such a limited resource in our community
35:11 where vulnerable people do have a space
35:12 to be able to go
35:13 or even people who come and go out of
35:15 our community in a way that may be
35:17 different from other citizens but really
35:19 still contribute
35:20 to our economy and to our success so i
35:23 think there's a lot of questions which
35:25 is why
35:25 which i was why i was emailing questions
35:27 all week about this
35:29 and so i was kind of hoping jen you
35:31 would be able to kind of give us
35:32 some more details really like how this
35:34 developer was chosen
35:36 and um to say how that number was chosen
35:38 why was it 175
35:40 rather than all of them and then there's
35:42 commercial retail underneath
35:44 um so i'd like to kind of dive deeper
35:47 into this
35:48 but on the face of it obviously moving
35:51 centurylink
35:52 um to um to that area looks
35:55 great um it's it fits a line with the
35:58 way that we kind of have
35:59 been planning things out and so on again
36:01 it's it starts out nice and then
36:03 for me it starts to kind of get really
36:05 fuzzy and i really hate doing code
36:07 changes
36:08 when things are still fuzzy if i may
36:12 jump in for just a minute this is
36:13 kristen listen with um cp
36:15 cpd um one thing is that this three zone
36:19 if the project doesn't happen the rezone
36:21 doesn't happen so
36:22 essentially so what you do is you set
36:26 i overstated that just a bit but you set
36:29 a date and you say
36:31 once permits for this part of the
36:33 project comes in then the rezone
36:35 happens that way you know that both of
36:36 them are going to happen for sure so
36:39 um it won't just we won't just be
36:42 rezoning something and then nothing
36:43 happens for one that
36:45 may address part of your question um and
36:47 then of course
36:48 i forgot the other part that i was going
36:49 to say and i apologize
36:51 um so go ahead i'll i'll remember it
36:53 later
36:54 so great great questions uh commissioner
36:58 lewis sorry um if there i guess you know
37:00 i guess what i would offer is to
37:02 um a couple different things is to take
37:05 a look at the website and see if i can
37:06 update some things and
37:08 get all the questions that you asked um
37:10 but also potentially come back later to
37:12 the ppc and provide an update about the
37:14 tod project because it is a very complex
37:17 long story and um you know it started
37:20 out with
37:20 us the city doing a request for
37:23 proposals
37:24 so we solicited and we had three teams
37:26 and this was the
37:27 um the partnership that we chose and
37:30 while it may seem like they're getting a
37:31 good deal
37:32 it's costing them about well i don't
37:34 want to quote numbers and
37:36 and not be correct but it's um more more
37:39 than we originally
37:40 anticipated to relocate centurylink and
37:43 there's a lot of nuances you're right
37:45 there's a lot of complexity
37:46 um and we will be actually going in
37:49 front of council this fall because we're
37:50 so right now we're negotiating the
37:52 purchase and sale agreement and
37:54 and that's three parties so you have the
37:55 city you have our development team
37:57 which is spectrum uh housing solutions
38:00 and king county housing
38:02 authority so there are two entities that
38:04 will be owning the tod site
38:06 and then a century link and so as i
38:08 mentioned that you know the
38:09 actual square or the actual land that um
38:13 we thought originally we we needed to
38:15 replace one for one because they have
38:16 four acres over there
38:18 we have we've talked to them and said
38:20 okay can we be more efficient with how
38:22 we lay out your
38:22 your your operation so they were
38:26 open to that and therefore there's more
38:28 space for us to own the land
38:29 which is the rv park afterwards um
38:32 regarding the rv park this land was not
38:35 meant to be an rv park forever it was
38:37 actually meant to
38:38 expand the operations of the public
38:41 works um
38:42 site and other city shops so
38:46 it was never meant to be a long-term
38:48 solution for affordable housing we
38:49 understand it
38:50 is being used for that and that's why
38:52 instead of saying let's just remove the
38:54 entire
38:54 rv park we are going to spend some
38:57 effort to see what we can do
38:59 to keep some of those those sites there
39:02 but in the long run
39:03 the city may in 5 10 15 years decide
39:06 they need to expand they want to move
39:08 facilities over from confluence park
39:10 they want to do xyz and that would be
39:13 displaced at that time so anyway i
39:15 it is probably 101 other things um but
39:18 i i would love to come back and give
39:20 more details i will if you i'll get your
39:22 email
39:23 um of the questions asked and i'll share
39:25 that and answer that and share that with
39:27 the entire commission whatever's
39:28 easiest um to proceed yeah i you know i
39:32 really appreciate
39:33 um staff putting on this um this
39:35 opportunity in this forum for us to
39:37 discuss these things before they're in
39:39 front of us for the vote because i think
39:40 it helps to kind of
39:41 um i really have as much information as
39:43 possible um
39:44 and often um you know our packets though
39:47 well prepared
39:48 it can be hard to include something that
39:49 has this multi-year history
39:52 um and something that really has a lot
39:54 of um important components to it
39:56 and so my big takeaway right now would
39:58 be to say that before we meet on this
40:00 again
40:00 the more information you have on this
40:02 the better and really to say that the
40:03 more that we're able to put forward to
40:05 the public
40:06 to present this how this is a win and
40:09 kind of how we came to these numbers
40:11 um i think it's really important to
40:12 really have um a broader transparency
40:15 about this
40:16 complicated project that hopefully
40:18 serves everybody
40:19 in the end but on the face of it the way
40:22 it's presented to me now um
40:24 doesn't necessarily look like that um
40:27 and again my goal is not to tear down um
40:30 this project that clearly has had a lot
40:31 of work into it and has a lot of great
40:33 potential to it
40:35 but i think that by adding more um
40:38 visibility
40:39 we'll be able to kind of um
40:42 bring a little bit more light to what's
40:44 going on
40:46 so kristen or uh jen
40:49 maybe you can in the future come back
40:52 with a very short presentation on how
40:55 basically what we went through when we
40:59 uh thought this was such a great idea
41:01 how the
41:02 how the things are being paid for and
41:06 how people are going to be supported
41:07 with it once they get in there
41:09 with all of the facilities in the bottom
41:12 half
41:13 you know it's been what two years or so
41:15 and a lot of people forgotten
41:17 exactly what it's going to be so you
41:20 know
41:20 instead of them being surprised i think
41:22 it would be nice to just say hey
41:24 look at this that's all i'll get behind
41:28 if you could do that sure i'll work with
41:32 kristin
41:34 um and just one comment before you guys
41:36 maybe leave affordable housing so
41:38 so the council has been talking about
41:40 affordable housing a lot um
41:42 and uh there is going to be
41:45 a presentation i believe on september
41:49 21st
41:50 uh at a council work uh study session
41:54 about affordable housing and one of the
41:56 things that
41:57 um chris and i have worked on is kind of
41:59 putting together
42:00 an overall view of affordable housing
42:03 and affordable housing tools and
42:05 and how productive they've been in our
42:08 city
42:09 over the past 20 years um and so that
42:12 will all be part of that conversation on
42:14 the 21st uh
42:16 we'll share that document with you guys
42:18 um one of the things that
42:20 um again not to counter anything you
42:22 said commissioner lewis
42:24 but to get 175 affordable housing units
42:27 in one project
42:29 that's that's a lot that that that'll be
42:31 at the
42:32 towards the top of our our ladder in
42:34 terms of kind of
42:35 bringing more units to our community so
42:39 but we'll have a a i think a more rich
42:41 conversation about that
42:43 uh in in future meetings but i just
42:45 wanted to add that there is this
42:47 separate affordable housing conversation
42:49 that will be going on with council
42:50 uh next month so i know there's a little
42:55 discussion on
42:56 affordable housing but i kind of like to
42:58 switch it and say
43:00 housing affordability and i think you
43:02 need to
43:03 bring that into it with all the things
43:05 that go around it not just
43:06 175 units or two units in a
43:10 complex which is normal
43:13 but all the things that go into making
43:17 that project affordable which the city
43:20 is going to have to do some work on
43:22 permitting costs and and time frames and
43:26 everything else to make that
43:27 uh go smoothly my comments
43:31 can i just can i just jump on without
43:33 adding to my chat since i
43:34 like like we were kind of talking about
43:36 keith i think that part of this
43:37 conversation used to be reframed a
43:39 little bit
43:39 with that transparency of saying like
43:41 what we're getting like one thing i love
43:42 about this project is that there's going
43:44 to be i think a quarter acre public park
43:46 you know one thing that's been
43:47 historically a problem with affordable
43:49 housing is it's often
43:50 not treated the same as other housing
43:52 and so you don't get the same kind of
43:53 facilities
43:54 and you don't get the same kind of
43:55 community feel so being able to put it
43:57 in a space
43:58 where there is no difference between
44:00 every other piece of housing
44:02 is really important um and so i love
44:05 that there's these components to it like
44:07 the public park and things like that so
44:09 there's a lot of good things
44:10 and being able to showcase i think all
44:12 of what's going on really aids in us
44:14 understanding like the depth of the
44:16 project
44:18 clearly um you know there's a gap here
44:20 between the enthusiasm that staff have
44:23 for this project
44:24 and where the commission is which means
44:26 we haven't done a very good job
44:27 communicating uh why it's a benefit and
44:30 why
44:31 it's uh worth getting excited about so
44:33 we have some work to do
44:34 that's what i hear well on the other
44:37 hand i'm really excited about it
44:39 but the presentation that that you guys
44:42 did bringing in
44:43 all the sides and how they're going to
44:46 pay for this was just
44:47 a remarkable plan that really hasn't
44:52 been done before kristin do you have a
44:55 question a comment
44:58 i already made it thank you okay just
45:01 just making sure
45:03 so any other questions before we go on
45:06 to the
45:06 final reason
45:17 okay
45:22 see all right so
45:26 the last one that we're going to talk
45:27 about is i hope i pronounce it right is
45:32 the vanama property this is a little
45:35 hard to see at least on my screen
45:38 but it is located on the southwest
45:41 corner of black nugget road
45:43 and highlands drive it
45:47 has a single family house it is abutted
45:50 on the south side
45:51 by the north fork issaquah creek
45:55 to the north and east our community
45:59 facilities
46:00 zones and most of those alton and north
46:03 have
46:04 detention stormwater detention ponds on
46:06 them
46:07 and the one directly to the east is
46:09 vacant and then to the west
46:12 and south of this property are
46:14 single-family estates
46:17 um and then you can see maybe the
46:19 striping below that that is where
46:21 the urban village lakeside is located
46:24 and will be developed and then
46:26 issaquah highlands is just off to the
46:29 southeast where all those pink dots are
46:32 it is goodness
46:35 very sensitive mouse it is currently the
46:37 land use designation
46:39 is low density residential they are
46:41 requesting
46:42 retail or mixed use the existing zoning
46:45 is single-family estates and they are
46:48 requesting professional office or mixed
46:50 use
46:52 the intent is to either potentially put
46:54 a dental office or some other use
46:56 perhaps mixed use on this site
47:04 currently they can have 30 percent
47:07 impervious 70 pervious
47:11 and a building height of 30 feet
47:14 to change it to professional office or
47:16 mixed use
47:18 the impervious surface could be either
47:20 for professional office it could be 65
47:22 percent
47:23 35 pervious 40 foot base height and 65
47:26 foot max height
47:27 and then for mixed use 90 percent
47:29 impervious 10
47:31 pervious 48 base and 65 percent
47:35 um max 65 sorry
47:38 65 foot max building height just like
47:40 professional office
47:43 so again the uses are fairly similar
47:46 professional office provides a few more
47:48 it's a huge list i'm not going to run
47:50 through it but it's
47:51 pretty much what we've seen with the
47:52 other districts tonight zoning district
47:54 tonight
47:55 um the pros are the area around this
47:59 is developed quite a bit you have um
48:02 kalhani to the north you have some
48:05 multi-family to the west
48:07 and as i mentioned lakeside and issaquah
48:09 highlands to the south
48:11 but the cons is that this site is
48:14 surrounded on all sides by other
48:15 community facilities or seeing a family
48:17 estates and it abuts
48:18 a creek and the city believes this to be
48:21 a proposed this
48:22 proposed reason if we did it it would be
48:24 a spot zone which is not legal which
48:26 means that
48:27 um it wouldn't be this use would not be
48:30 consistent in any way with any of the
48:31 surrounding
48:32 the uses that surround it so we don't
48:35 feel that we can
48:36 do it at this time so our recommendation
48:38 is no change for this
48:41 uh property
48:45 that's what i have chris
48:50 um i get the two confused yes it is
48:53 close to one of the yes
48:57 it's close to it yeah let me go back up
49:02 can you see my mouse um i
49:05 think that this one right in here is
49:06 sunrise you can see that
49:08 where the brown is i thought it went all
49:11 the way up
49:12 well i guess it's there there are two
49:14 and there's another one up here
49:17 in this property and then there's one
49:18 here
49:20 two care facilities i think this one is
49:23 sunrise
49:25 yeah that one's sunrise okay
49:28 okay so are there any questions
49:32 about this one we don't have anything
49:36 in the in the chat oh commission
49:39 commissioner foul
49:40 just uh submitted for a
49:43 of course everything needs a comment um
49:47 so i support the city i think on this
49:49 one here because
49:50 if we hypothetically did allow this to
49:54 retail or mixed use the egress onto
49:57 this property would be very difficult if
49:59 you had
50:01 um high volume
50:05 i have a map of this property pulled up
50:08 with highlands drive and southeast black
50:10 nugget road high volume
50:12 but the type of traffic patterns that
50:15 are there
50:16 would make egress on this property very
50:18 difficult and maybe even a liability
50:22 if you look at if you look at sunrise i
50:24 think they have a
50:26 problem getting in and out i'm surprised
50:28 there
50:31 it's exactly it's what it is i often
50:34 wondered how they can
50:36 go around the bend and go down the hill
50:42 anything else
50:46 okay so i'm going to
50:50 share my screen again and if there are
50:54 questions or before we get into that um
50:59 is there anybody who would like any uh
51:02 i'm gonna open up to audience comments
51:07 i know that there's somebody here from
51:09 the landscaping
51:10 legacy landscaping i was wondering if he
51:13 would like to
51:14 to speak
51:20 hey he might be muted
51:23 i don't know yes i will unmute him
51:29 okay hear me now yeah we can hear you
51:32 chris
51:33 okay thank you hi i'm chris hallick i'm
51:35 the owner there of legacy landscaping
51:38 we've been there since about 2008 and i
51:40 appreciate you guys
51:42 time and listening and taking on um this
51:44 perspective
51:45 um i do want to mention that there was
51:47 some questioning about some
51:50 neighbors and some history and things
51:51 that have gone on
51:53 previously to my ownership and i'm happy
51:56 to report that i have
51:58 all uh neighbors backing me in the
52:01 transition of us
52:02 being considered mixed use or commercial
52:04 use with the property
52:17 is there anybody else that would like to
52:20 speak
52:25 hearing none
52:30 um do any of you have any
52:34 questions answers comments
52:39 nothing we have a comment from
52:42 commissioner lewis i
52:46 had one comment um and it's specifically
52:48 about
52:49 page 18 and it talks about the
52:52 likelihood of housing targets being
52:53 increased
52:54 um i communicated with staff my feelings
52:57 about this but on the record i wanted to
53:00 mention
53:01 you know every year when we um when we
53:03 get our updates and we can really look
53:04 and see
53:05 um where we on our housing targets where
53:08 we're on our job
53:08 targets you know we always see this kind
53:10 of weighted
53:12 um in favor more of housing um and
53:15 and not so much on the jobs and uh when
53:17 looking at those targets
53:18 um you know we've been lucky because
53:21 we've kind of had an ace in our pocket
53:22 with costco
53:23 um and if you take that away um jobs
53:27 doesn't look quite as
53:28 rosy as we would like it to and um
53:32 when i see that we'll most likely be
53:34 increasing
53:35 the housing part it gives me a little
53:37 bit of pause
53:38 and i just want to mention that um we're
53:41 always wanting things to be done to
53:43 scale
53:44 so that services are done right now we
53:47 see
53:47 you know schools being open with
53:49 portables obviously kids aren't
53:51 physically in school right now but when
53:52 we think about the long-term planning of
53:54 our community
53:55 um we don't want to see gaps and
53:57 services
53:58 and it concerns me to say oh hey that
54:01 it just it felt like a slide in i guess
54:03 is what i'm going to say is that when i
54:04 was reading it
54:05 to say oh and just anticipate that we'll
54:07 be increasing those numbers
54:10 when it gets revisited i would like to
54:12 get a little
54:13 a little more information on that um so
54:15 i just kind of wanted to bring that up
54:17 since it was part of our packet today
54:20 keith i have a question for you
54:24 um with this new housing going in across
54:27 from the
54:28 transit center are there any other plans
54:30 to add more housing
54:33 uh near the transit center
54:43 so right now um you know so so basically
54:47 um we figure out how to approach this
54:50 one
54:51 um so let's keep talking in circles so
54:53 um keith niven
54:55 director of community planning and
54:57 development um
54:59 so we basically upzoned all of central
55:03 which is so everything within walking
55:05 distance of the transit center on sr 900
55:09 basically allows for residential and
55:12 commercial
55:13 at high densities um
55:16 around the park and ride up at isiqua
55:18 highlands um
55:20 you know uh basically what's
55:23 left is um the non-residential
55:27 uh that's owned by issaquah highlands
55:30 investment fund
55:31 um and because all the stuff that's
55:34 behind it on west of ninth that's under
55:38 construction that's all
55:39 taylor morrison which used to be polygon
55:42 and it's
55:43 basically all under construction and
55:44 there's somewhere around 400 units back
55:47 in there that's that that are being
55:48 built and that's
55:49 really still walkable to the highlands
55:51 parking rate garage
55:53 um but you know that's kind of
55:56 it at the moment now at some point
55:59 2041 i guess 20 is it 2041
56:03 sorry it's been a long time since i
56:05 thought about the transit center so
56:07 you know by then you know assuming you
56:09 know sound transit
56:10 is still functioning and gets st3 done
56:15 um you know we should have a transit
56:18 center
56:18 on the valley floor um there you know
56:22 they've said they really don't want to
56:23 do a citing study until
56:26 um 2026 so that's still a few years away
56:31 you know and then the question for us
56:33 might be you know do we want to
56:35 try and do something to encourage
56:37 residential
56:40 approximate to where that facility is
56:42 going to go or is the market going to do
56:44 that on its own
56:45 you know with costco building their new
56:47 office building
56:49 you know the rallies have built um their
56:52 poplar office building is nearing
56:55 completion
56:56 gilman lofts is got temporary
56:59 certificate of occupancy so there's some
57:00 more office
57:01 that's really the first office that
57:03 we've gotten in
57:05 a really really long time um you know
57:08 it's been just housing housing housing
57:11 so you know the pendulum usually swings
57:13 back and forth
57:14 and so my guess is once like especially
57:17 once
57:18 costco's 640 000 square foot office
57:21 building is done
57:22 my guess is there will be more people
57:25 wanting to build housing near that
57:27 um and so we'll see uh but there's right
57:30 now
57:31 other than just the zoning that we put
57:33 in place
57:34 um commissioner i don't know that
57:36 there's there's nothing
57:38 there's there's nothing in the pipeline
57:40 now that suggests
57:42 another big housing project coming in
57:45 other than the tod project which we
57:46 talked about earlier tonight
57:48 and that's the one that the city's been
57:50 kind of facilitating
57:53 so you talked about uh transit
57:56 um i just want to have a area
58:00 that you can build that i don't want
58:03 houses to come in and big buildings to
58:05 come in because you're not going to
58:06 get rid of them so i think we have to
58:09 have a basic
58:10 kind well it could go in this area this
58:13 seems reasonable let's wait a while
58:15 to put a 30-story building on it
58:19 that's all um anything else for the
58:22 for the good then we'll go back to
58:25 kristin
58:27 again this is kristin leeson with cpd
58:28 and i just wanted to address
58:29 commissioner one of commissioner lewis's
58:31 thoughts about the
58:32 um that will be our targets our housing
58:35 targets will likely be increasing in the
58:36 future
58:37 so one of the things that we've been
58:39 working on over the past year is our
58:40 buildable land
58:41 study or our growth capacity study which
58:43 is something that we do about every
58:45 eight
58:46 years or so with this one the county and
58:49 the state are requiring that we
58:52 renegotiate growth targets for the
58:55 county
58:55 and each city is required to take a
58:58 certain new amount of
58:59 amount of new growth both housing and
59:01 jobs
59:02 so while we get to negotiate that
59:06 based on what our capacity actually is
59:09 um we will likely be getting more
59:12 housing we want or you know our targets
59:14 will increase a little bit we don't have
59:15 much of a choice for both jobs and
59:19 housing so we are in we just finished
59:22 phase three we turned that in last week
59:24 and once
59:25 we hear more information on you know
59:27 phase three's right
59:28 we're going to come back to planning
59:30 policy commission and the city council
59:32 and say here's where we stand and here's
59:34 what all of our numbers say
59:36 here's hopefully we can say here's what
59:38 the county is looking for
59:39 and kind of here's the direction that
59:41 we're like to head but what we want to
59:42 do is
59:43 focus on that growth the reason one of
59:44 the reasons that we did central issaquah
59:46 was so that we could re so that we could
59:48 put all of this new growth that we knew
59:50 would be coming with new targets into
59:51 central issaquah
59:54 you know one thing that um the pandemic
59:57 has done
59:58 has caused a lot of employers to rethink
1:00:00 their office space needs
1:00:02 so you know i mean take a look at i
1:00:04 think the biggest domino that fell
1:00:06 locally
1:00:06 was rei basically backing out of their
1:00:10 new building
1:00:11 in the spring district you know so as we
1:00:13 talk about
1:00:14 housing and employment you know i think
1:00:17 there's
1:00:18 there's probably going to be a little
1:00:20 bit of time that
1:00:21 uh we all need to see what happens
1:00:25 once we get past the pandemic and how
1:00:27 much return to work
1:00:29 is there and how much remote working
1:00:30 continues
1:00:32 because all of that affects everything
1:00:35 that all of our plans are based on
1:00:36 all of our plans expect these work
1:00:38 centers that have
1:00:40 you know supporting retail and housing
1:00:42 within walking distance well if
1:00:44 everybody's working from their home
1:00:46 um that's a different that's a different
1:00:48 equation in my mind
1:00:49 so so i think where we are is a strange
1:00:52 place
1:00:53 in terms of kind of trying to predict
1:00:56 how things are going to grow you know
1:00:58 what kristin is doing in term
1:01:00 in terms of buildable lands is on par
1:01:03 with what we've done for a very long
1:01:05 time with king county and with psrc
1:01:08 in the state and you know does that need
1:01:10 to change
1:01:11 um at some point you know i don't know
1:01:13 it's i think there's still a lot of
1:01:15 balls in the air in terms of
1:01:17 seeing how all this plays out and and
1:01:20 whether everybody returns back to work
1:01:22 or whether
1:01:23 there's a hybrid workforce that we're
1:01:26 that we're all dealing with you know for
1:01:29 a long time to come
1:01:31 so bouncing off of that
1:01:34 um with everybody staying at home and
1:01:36 using more
1:01:38 uh internet
1:01:41 more power um what's the status of
1:01:45 all of the att and
1:01:49 those guys putting in there five
1:01:52 uh what's going on with that
1:01:56 um well what i can tell you is um i
1:01:59 think a t and t
1:02:01 got uh got slapped on the wrist for
1:02:05 calling theirs 5g edge
1:02:08 because it really wasn't 5g but they
1:02:10 were claiming they were on the edge of
1:02:13 and i think the fcc told them to stop so
1:02:15 they can
1:02:16 i haven't heard any att advertisements
1:02:19 lately but
1:02:20 um where we are is
1:02:23 um there's a couple things going on um
1:02:26 you know so
1:02:27 obviously t-mobile gobbled up sprint
1:02:31 um and you know there's you know so
1:02:34 right now you've got
1:02:36 t-mobile verizon uh at t
1:02:39 and comcast would probably be your
1:02:41 fourth carrier that we have locally
1:02:43 um you know a lot of people have been
1:02:46 complaining about internet speeds
1:02:48 because there's just more use out of
1:02:51 households now
1:02:53 i don't think comcast has done much in
1:02:56 issaquah
1:02:57 to improve
1:03:00 kind of bandwidth which then leaves
1:03:02 people ultimately with
1:03:05 maybe a choice to use 5g once
1:03:08 it's available um right now we haven't
1:03:11 really seen
1:03:12 much activity from the carriers
1:03:15 in issaquah but there is some
1:03:19 conversations going on
1:03:20 about with t-mobile um in terms of maybe
1:03:24 doing
1:03:25 some sort of 5g pilot project in our
1:03:27 community so
1:03:29 so stay tuned so to speak um
1:03:32 you know that there has not been an
1:03:35 avalanche of new antennas installed in
1:03:37 our community
1:03:38 once we passed our wireless code um
1:03:41 so you know i think there's just been
1:03:44 probably other things happening
1:03:46 um but you know it's all a lot of it's
1:03:48 demand-based
1:03:49 and so you know as people are now
1:03:51 demanding more
1:03:53 um access to high-speed out of their
1:03:55 households
1:03:56 you know it's likely that 5g will
1:03:59 probably be the answer for that
1:04:01 i just don't want to see a box every 500
1:04:06 throughout the entire city it would go
1:04:09 it would be crazy yeah well and there's
1:04:12 continuous lawsuits by local government
1:04:17 in the ninth circuit uh pretty much
1:04:20 just to give you a summary is that
1:04:23 you know local governments pretty much
1:04:25 lost all of their appeals
1:04:28 um to try to regain some of their local
1:04:31 authority
1:04:31 over um the wireless carriers
1:04:35 um so you know basically what the fcc
1:04:38 said is
1:04:39 it's an essential infrastructure and
1:04:41 therefore
1:04:42 many of the things that we try to do
1:04:45 in terms of aesthetics and placement
1:04:49 we don't have very many tools to use so
1:04:52 the code that we adopted
1:04:54 um at least my understanding is it's
1:04:57 still
1:04:57 fine i think everything that we put in
1:04:59 there is still
1:05:01 uh relevant um but you know i think the
1:05:05 municipalities were hoping to get a
1:05:06 little bit more control back
1:05:09 over sighting and aesthetics and that
1:05:11 doesn't look like that's
1:05:12 going to happen if i were to guess so
1:05:15 stay tuned
1:05:16 stay tuned commissioner fall
1:05:19 fall has a comment
1:05:22 so thanks keith for that information i
1:05:24 was actually very interested in that
1:05:26 discussion as well and i think to one of
1:05:29 your points and to
1:05:31 joy's point as well as far as bandwidth
1:05:34 if we don't have adequate bandwidth to
1:05:37 support
1:05:38 the needs of the community
1:05:41 we may have an increase in traffic
1:05:45 because people will be moving into the
1:05:47 office so
1:05:48 one of the ways that we may be able to
1:05:50 actually help reduce
1:05:52 congestion in the city is encouraging
1:05:55 people to work from home so we may have
1:05:58 another tool in our tool belt to say we
1:06:01 high-speed internet that is able to
1:06:04 support the community and therefore
1:06:06 that's a way to keep people out of their
1:06:10 so um and right now i'll be honest my
1:06:13 internet sucks
1:06:14 i mean i don't need to say that a lot
1:06:18 it's terrible um but
1:06:22 you know we could also use that as a
1:06:23 strategic tool to help
1:06:25 reduce traffic
1:06:32 so i don't see any more comments so i'm
1:06:34 going to go back again to kristen
1:06:36 to um give us an update of what's going
1:06:39 to happen
1:06:40 now meetings what's going on
1:06:47 you're muted
1:06:50 because they they kind of whoops
1:06:53 you hear me yeah because you they kind
1:06:55 of merged the two things i was going to
1:06:56 talk about the schedule
1:06:57 and the next steps so our next meeting
1:07:00 is september 10th and we are scheduled
1:07:04 to talk about
1:07:06 the architectural standards potentially
1:07:10 with dc
1:07:12 the comprehensive plan will go over the
1:07:14 rest of the amendments that we have
1:07:16 for our public hearing and then the
1:07:18 mastermind the mobility master plan
1:07:20 stephen is going to come back and talk
1:07:21 to you all about that
1:07:23 we had originally planned on megan
1:07:25 coming back
1:07:26 to talk about the environmental board
1:07:29 but she has asked if we could
1:07:30 can move that public hearing uh we
1:07:32 couldn't continue it so we're doing it
1:07:34 again
1:07:35 and we want to do that she wants to do
1:07:36 that on the 24th
1:07:38 which means that on the 24th we will
1:07:40 have the
1:07:41 environmental board public hearing as
1:07:43 well as
1:07:44 the comprehensive plan public hearing
1:07:47 for we'll start it um
1:07:51 for the rezones that'll be our this our
1:07:53 discussion that night and then we'll
1:07:55 continue it to
1:07:56 october 8th where we'll talk about you
1:07:59 well guys won't make a decision yet you
1:08:01 won't make a recommendation yet
1:08:02 and then we continue until october 8th
1:08:04 look at the rest of the comp plan
1:08:05 amendments and then you make a
1:08:06 recommendation on everything
1:08:08 the rezones and the rest of the comp
1:08:11 plan amendments
1:08:12 the schedules change just a little bit
1:08:16 um stay tuned yes do you all have any
1:08:19 questions you think you can handle that
1:08:21 is there anything else you'd like to see
1:08:24 i know jen and i are going to work
1:08:25 together to get her back here as well
1:08:27 and i think the only date that we could
1:08:28 do that will be on the 10th
1:08:29 sorry i apologize no um do you think
1:08:32 that we're going to be able to discuss
1:08:34 the mobility plan in one meeting
1:08:39 i hope so i
1:08:42 i have all the confidence that it will
1:08:45 not happen
1:08:46 okay um if it
1:08:52 why i said could we divide it in half
1:08:54 and have it in two different you know
1:08:56 part of it um one time part of it the
1:08:59 other
1:09:00 well the problem is you do it tonight
1:09:03 the problem is is that he is out of town
1:09:05 today
1:09:06 and will be out of town on the 24th so
1:09:10 what do you need from him to help focus
1:09:13 that conversation a little bit better to
1:09:14 see what we can get through on the 20
1:09:16 on the 10th
1:09:20 uh commissioner joy lewis is jumping in
1:09:22 randomly and rudely um i
1:09:24 went ahead and i sent you my questions
1:09:27 on the master mobility plan
1:09:29 um to from to help this you know
1:09:32 continue that dialogue i think one thing
1:09:34 that would help before we see stephen
1:09:35 again is to say
1:09:37 a specific document or a specific
1:09:39 section that says
1:09:40 here's what's changed right because we
1:09:41 have this giant document which i'm sure
1:09:43 we're all going to read
1:09:44 for another time but being able to say
1:09:47 you know answering individual questions
1:09:49 you know offline but also here's what we
1:09:51 heard from the community and so
1:09:52 here's what's different might also help
1:09:54 speed that up a little bit
1:09:57 so this is kristin leeson here's what's
1:09:59 different between the comprehensive plan
1:10:01 and what is in the mobility master plan
1:10:03 or here's what's different from last
1:10:05 you saw the plan here's what's different
1:10:07 from the last time you saw the plan
1:10:10 it might help facilitate our
1:10:11 conversation a little better um so
1:10:13 um to be able to say like obviously
1:10:16 we'll get we'll get our initial
1:10:17 questions answered offline that being
1:10:18 able to have something he says and maybe
1:10:20 the answer is nothing
1:10:21 we think this document is perfect as it
1:10:23 is but i'm guessing they're going to say
1:10:25 we've taken some feedback from
1:10:27 the community and some dialogue here and
1:10:30 there with council and this is what's
1:10:31 different might help
1:10:32 break down that big document a little
1:10:34 better and facilitate the conversation
1:10:35 rolling a little bit better
1:10:36 specifically on the master mobility plan
1:10:39 so do we have to
1:10:41 say yay or nay at some point in time
1:10:45 during during the comprehensive plan
1:10:48 amendment public hearing
1:10:49 that is when you say yay or nay okay
1:10:52 council will have already endorsed the
1:10:54 plan at that point
1:10:56 hopefully that's that's that's the plan
1:10:59 um it's going a little backwards this
1:11:06 so if they endorse the plan so it's
1:11:08 already done
1:11:11 and we make all these comments do they
1:11:13 go back
1:11:15 to the plan do they consider them or
1:11:18 is it just a a nice thing to do
1:11:23 it will be a lot like the parks plan was
1:11:26 so the parks plane was adopted before it
1:11:28 in put into the comprehensive plan but
1:11:30 you all said
1:11:31 at the end of it you said we will put
1:11:33 this in here but
1:11:35 we want and it was in the findings of
1:11:36 fact i believe we want to be able to
1:11:38 come back and revisit this and address
1:11:40 policies next year which i know
1:11:42 stephen is planning on doing anyway
1:11:44 because it's
1:11:45 it's been fast and there are some things
1:11:47 that he would like to see
1:11:49 done a little bit differently so yes you
1:11:51 will have the not this year
1:11:53 but next year yes you would have the
1:11:55 chance to do that
1:11:58 okay anything else for the good of the
1:12:02 order
1:12:07 so if there are no uh
1:12:12 problems or suggestions or whatever i'm
1:12:16 going to close the meeting
1:12:17 and i'm actually going to look at the
1:12:18 clock this time and say we're going to
1:12:21 close the meeting at 7
1:12:23 51. thank you
1:12:26 thank you goodbye

Attendance

Council / Members (9)
Administration/Staff: Joan Probala
Christen Leeson
Senior Planner Ron Faul
Doug Yormick
Asst. Planner Joy Lewis Keith Niven
Director
Planning & Janice Carle Community Development Jason Voiss Jen Davis Hayes
Economic Dev. Mgr. Commissioners Not Present: Bill Rinehart Robin Beukers
Alternate (excused)