← Back to City Council Digest

Planning Policy Commission Auto captions

Thursday, July 8, 2021

6:30 PM
Topic tracked across meetings:
Comprehensive Plan Update: Housing and Land Use ID 1404 5/7
Section
1. CALL TO ORDER
1a
Commission Membership
packet pp.3
Staff report:
PLANNING POLICY COMMISSION Staff Liaison Christen Leeson, Senior About Planner Created in 1983, this commission serves as a Email policy advisory body to the Mayor and provides guidance and direction for Issaquah's future Regular Members growth through continued review and 2022 – Joy Lewis improvement to the City's Comprehensive Land 2022 – Matt Monahan Use Plan and related land use documents. 2022 – Jason Voiss 2022 – Vacant Membership 2023 – Nina Milligan The Planning Policy Commission is comprised of 2024 – Ron Faul seven regular members, with four-year terms; 2024 – Sara Bader and several alternates, with two-year terms. All members are appointed by the Mayor and Alternate Members subject to confirmation by the City Council. 2022 - Richard Zaragoza Terms expire April 30 of the year listed. For 2023 - Vacant more information, see IMC 18.03 and Rules & Regulations. Meetings Unless…
2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
2a
Minutes of June 24, 2021
packet pp.5–10
Staff report:
VOISS opened the meeting for Commissioner
3. REGULAR BUSINESS
3a
Proposed 2021 Comprehensive Plan Amendments: Land Use Tables and Milano Redesignation/Rezone Request
Christen Leeson, Senior Planner · packet pp.11–27
Topics: Land Use
Staff report:
In February of this year, the City Council approved the 2021 Docket of Proposed Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Map Amendments. The following amendments will be discussed at the July 8, 2021, Planning Policy Commission Meeting.
3b
Title 18 Update: Tracking of Public Comments, (D)
Minnie Dhaliwal, Director, Community Planning & Development · packet pp.29–61
Topics: Land Use
Staff report:
MEMORANDUM TO: Planning Policy Commission FROM: Katie Cote, AICP, BHC Consultants Tyler Quinn-Smith, BHC Consultants RE: Public Comment Tracking & Acknowledgement DATE: July 8, 2021
4. REPORTS
4a
Council Updates
Christen Leeson, Senior Planner
5. OTHER BUSINESS / ANNOUNCEMENTS
5a
Upcoming Schedule
packet pp.63–65
Staff report:
FEBRUARY AUGUST 2/11/21 Cancelled 8/12/21 ▪ 2021 Comprhensive Plan Amendments: Land Use Element: Climate Change policies 2/25/21 Cancelled 8/26/21 Joint meeting with Park Board ▪ Title 18: Education MARCH SEPTEMBER 3/11/21 ▪ Public Hearing: Electric Vehicle Charging 9/9/21 Joint meeting with Development Commission Stations ▪ Title 18: Education ▪ CPPs and Growth Targets Presentation (Informational) 3/25/21 ▪ PPC/EVC Joint Meeting: Title 18: Signs 9/23/21 ▪ Public Hearing: 2021 Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Map Amendments APRIL OCTOBER 4/8/21 Cancelled 10/14/21 ▪ Public Hearing: 2021 Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Map Amendments (continued) 4/22/21 ▪ Public Hearing: Signs Amendments 10/28/21 Joint meeting with Development Commission ▪ CIP/TIP
0:35 all right
0:36 we'll go ahead and call the order i say
0:38 good evening
0:39 like to call the order call the meeting
0:41 to order at 6 30
0:43 pm uh due to the virtual format of
0:46 today's meeting i'd like to start by
0:47 providing some guidelines
0:49 we have participants attending by
0:51 computer and others who may be attending
0:53 by phone
0:54 for all meeting attendees please speak
0:57 clearly and pause frequently
0:59 state your name each time before
1:01 speaking
1:02 mute your microphone when not speaking
1:05 and if you have technical difficulties
1:06 try
1:07 joining the meeting using a different
1:08 device such as a smartphone or tablet
1:11 or use the call-in information on the
1:14 meeting invite to call into the meeting
1:19 at tonight's meeting we will be
1:21 discussing some of the proposed 2021
1:23 comprehensive plan amendments following
1:26 followed by the tracking of public
1:27 comments in the title 18 update
1:31 and we'll move to attendance kristen
1:33 will you please call the roll
1:37 yes i should note that commissioners
1:39 zaragoza
1:40 and voice have excused absences this
1:42 evening
1:44 and then commissioner milligan
1:48 you're on mute
1:52 i see you i know you're here
2:00 okay uh commissioner monahan here
2:04 commissioner lewis here mr vader
2:08 here and chair fall here
2:14 commissioner milligan do you have your
2:16 have you can you try it again
2:18 can you hear me yes there we go thank
2:21 you that's this little thing
2:22 thank you thank you okay now we'll move
2:26 to the approval of the media meeting
2:28 minutes
2:28 from june 24th um
2:32 are there any corrections to the june
2:34 24th meeting minutes
2:36 i have a correction on page
2:39 nine of the packet so it's the
2:42 minutes page i don't know
2:47 um where we go one two three on the um
2:51 uh the different objectives
2:54 top of the page is oh god
2:58 i am using i'm working without a mouse
3:00 here it's where it um
3:02 where it says you know our comments
3:04 about sections one two three
3:08 do you know where i am um
3:12 page zero zero zero zero why does it say
3:15 that at the top top of the pages voice
3:17 said he appreciates monahan's point
3:20 that's at the top of the page milligan
3:21 is halfway down
3:23 and uh near the end of the paragraph
3:26 that says milligan said she won and two
3:29 agrees
3:30 um halfway down says she
3:36 uh oh um we should try to
3:40 enhance connectivity i made a point of
3:42 saying that that was for non-motorized
3:44 vehicles
3:46 so i went somehow in that paragraph to
3:48 emphasize
3:49 connectivity between neighborhoods with
3:51 non-motorized vehicle
3:53 connections
3:56 that's it
4:00 okay uh any other corrections that would
4:03 like to be noted
4:06 and kristen you got that uh nina's
4:08 updates okay
4:10 uh with that the main minutes are
4:12 approved
4:14 now we'll move on to regular business so
4:16 we're going to go ahead and
4:17 talk about the proposed 2021
4:19 comprehensive plan amendments
4:21 land use tables and the milano
4:24 redesignation and rezone request
4:31 and tonight chris and bowl go ahead and
4:35 our senior planner will present the 2021
4:37 comprehensive plan and zoning map
4:39 amendments regarding several land use
4:41 element tables and the milano
4:43 redesignation
4:45 rezone request this is for discussion
4:47 only no recommendation will be made
4:49 tonight
4:52 and kristen go ahead and towards yours
4:56 you all can see my screen
4:59 yes okay thank you and this is kristen
5:02 leeson senior planner and again i can't
5:05 as a presenter i can't see comments
5:07 and questions so if uh it's your fault
5:10 if you could let me know
5:11 if those come that i would appreciate it
5:13 i'd be happy to
5:14 thank you so yes tonight we're talking
5:16 about a few of the proposed 2021
5:19 comprehensive plan and zoning map
5:20 amendments
5:23 and we are going to review discuss and
5:26 ask questions
5:27 and there are no recommendations tonight
5:29 but i need to know
5:30 for the september and october public
5:32 hearings what information that i
5:34 still need to provide you all in order
5:36 for you to be able to make
5:37 recommendations
5:38 so tonight we're talking about several
5:40 of the land use element tables
5:42 and the request from romano for a
5:44 redesignation
5:45 and reason of a property
5:49 so first make that goal there
5:53 yeah sorry something in the way
5:56 uh first we're talking about uh table l2
5:59 units tour 2031 state adopted housing
6:02 target
6:03 and in 2021 we added
6:06 315 new housing units that means that
6:09 they were
6:10 filed or completed and signed off on
6:13 this also means then that we exceeded
6:15 our 2031
6:17 housing target and are now at 104
6:20 i should note that we get new housing
6:22 targets at the end of this year which
6:24 will run from 2019
6:25 through 2044.
6:31 are there any questions on that one
6:35 okay next is l3
6:39 jobs toward 2031 state adopted jobs
6:41 targets now this one we kind of went the
6:43 opposite direction but it's kind of
6:44 understandable so in 2020 the year of
6:46 covid
6:48 we lost a little over 3 000 jobs which
6:51 took us down from being at about 53
6:53 percent to being at almost
6:54 80 or 38 of our target so we dropped
6:58 quite a bit which means we would still
6:59 need
6:59 an almost 12 500 jobs to hit our target
7:03 but again we were getting we are getting
7:05 new targets in
7:06 at the end at q4 um which
7:10 so essentially we start over
7:14 and capacity
7:17 um this
7:20 this tells us how much redevelopable and
7:23 vacant land that we have in the city
7:24 that can still be developed
7:27 and this is a very long process and we
7:30 take out we haven't done this probably
7:31 since 2002
7:33 and we have done annexation since since
7:35 then and
7:36 land has been rezoned and lots of
7:39 changes
7:40 so vegan is vacant it's anything with a
7:44 something you know an improvement of ten
7:46 thousand dollars or less
7:47 on it and or it's vacant um
7:50 redevelopable we take out things like
7:52 condominiums
7:54 um housing that is
7:57 has been built since say 2010 uh
8:00 you take out all community property you
8:02 take out religious facilities government
8:04 facilities all those things come out
8:06 and determine this so our capacity right
8:10 now we have
8:12 uh 551 essentially residential acres
8:16 197 commercial acres
8:19 and the capacity for 11 743
8:22 housing units and five hundred 15 sixty
8:25 one jobs
8:28 um is there any question on this one are
8:30 there any questions or comments
8:32 i have a question yes commissioner
8:35 milligan here
8:36 um uh plan release and the number for
8:39 jobs
8:40 net capacity have is that
8:44 below our target and
8:47 has it always been below our target
8:49 since we created the central isoqua plan
8:52 i can't remember so it's changed um
8:57 as you can see our target way back when
8:59 was 26 711 and that was
9:02 that was in 2014. um we
9:06 at the time had still before that um had
9:09 options for microsoft that we had
9:12 anticipated so anyway
9:15 it is enough for our proposed new
9:17 targets
9:19 and it is enough to accommodate what we
9:20 would still need to make for the 2031
9:22 targets
9:24 i think i was going in a direction
9:26 originally that you didn't ask me so
9:27 that's the answer is that um
9:29 yes we have enough to meet our targets
9:34 okay
9:37 a question here so uh looking at the
9:40 housing
9:41 um blue box um very low density
9:44 looks like we have net housing capacity
9:46 for 399 i say
9:48 i assume very low density means
9:50 single-family homes
9:52 that correct yes yes so didn't we have
9:56 um about 34 or 35
10:01 um buildable lots last year
10:05 and now we have 3.99 so
10:08 well that was lots that wasn't units
10:16 and i know what you're talking about is
10:17 a few years ago when we looked at um
10:20 we were trying to estimate how many um
10:23 how many units we could still put in the
10:26 399 seems like a
10:28 big bump from previous discussions
10:32 and and i'd have to look back and see
10:34 what that number was that was a few
10:36 years ago
10:37 okay my question is
10:40 if we were only around 35-ish
10:43 or single-family homes and we're now at
10:45 399.
10:48 where are those lots
10:51 um a lot of it's redevelopable land
10:54 um so there's some up there
10:58 some up in squawk um
11:01 they're it's just scattered all around
11:05 um you still have things up above
11:07 overdale park
11:08 that could be developed you know you
11:10 have some plaques that may have been
11:12 approved but nothing's been built yet so
11:14 that doesn't count
11:16 okay are we talking about lot splits
11:18 that have happened
11:23 no again i'd have to look and i remember
11:25 i i can't remember if we covered the
11:27 entire city or if we were just looking
11:29 at squawk mountain
11:30 and sycamore at that time okay
11:33 yeah i just don't know where we came up
11:35 with 3.99 because that's a huge bump for
11:37 if you can imagine a 400 homes that's a
11:40 lot of homes for
11:43 very low density i mean uh yeah
11:46 it just seems like a it doesn't smell
11:49 right
11:50 i mean it just something doesn't jive
11:53 i guess okay well and it i'll go back
11:56 and i'll look at it
11:57 um but it may be comparing apples to
11:59 oranges too you know there were
12:00 different factors considered in this
12:02 and you know the quick you know what we
12:04 did a few years ago just in-house
12:07 um i'll i'll take a look and let you
12:08 know okay
12:10 yeah thank you that's it no more
12:12 questions no more
12:14 okay all right the last table for the
12:17 land use element
12:19 is the population in household
12:20 projections
12:22 so i think this is really small and i
12:24 apologize
12:25 um but i think that the numbers to
12:28 really look at here
12:29 are um the current population and
12:32 households so
12:33 we submit permits to
12:36 um the office of financial management or
12:40 we submit permits to the
12:41 puget sound regional council every year
12:43 to say how many
12:45 housing units have been filed and issued
12:47 in that year
12:48 and they go through their paperwork and
12:50 they come back with a number for us
12:52 and they said that we now have 17 739
12:56 housing units
12:57 and it's a population of 39
13:00 840. some changes that they made this
13:04 year the occupancy rate went
13:05 up from 0.95 percent to 0.96
13:09 which over time makes a difference as
13:11 does the persons per household which
13:13 went from
13:14 2.32 persons per 3.21
13:17 2.31 persons per household to 2.32
13:20 persons per household
13:22 which again over time will make a
13:23 difference i think there's a question
13:26 i saw something pop up i even has a
13:30 question
13:30 okay commissioner milligan here i was
13:33 just putting that in the queue for
13:35 finishing your presentation on this
13:38 slide are you done kristen
13:39 i am done okay my
13:42 question for you is uh i was wondering
13:46 why
13:46 lakeside units are counted in the
13:49 current columns
13:51 but the rowley units are only
13:54 counted in future columns both of them
13:56 are under development agreements
13:58 i didn't understand the discrepancy
14:00 there well lakeside actually has
14:02 um housing units there and
14:06 the uh central isfan
14:09 and the urban corn rally there are no
14:11 housing units
14:18 okay yeah i'll look at it again
14:21 okay yes and it's the urban core it's
14:23 not central is the urban core that
14:25 doesn't have any housing units right now
14:27 okay yeah thanks and kristen we have a
14:30 question from commissioner lewis
14:32 okay thank you commissioner joy lewis
14:36 my question is about um the projections
14:39 for future population
14:41 i was curious why in 2030 to 2040 we
14:45 see an increase that's different from
14:46 what we're projecting right now from 30
14:48 what is it that we're estimating some
14:50 sort of growth rate that doesn't stay
14:52 steady
14:53 are you talking about the total number
14:55 or a number for a certain area
14:57 yeah so right now we're roughly
14:59 estimating that we're going to add
15:00 around 5000 people
15:02 by 2030 but then that bumps up to about
15:04 8 000 people for 2040
15:06 and so i'm curious why that doesn't
15:07 remain steady what the reason is for the
15:09 projected population
15:10 increase in the years 20 30 to 20 40.
15:14 a lot a lot of that's because
15:16 development there are some development
15:17 agreements that do not comple that are
15:19 not supposed to be done until around
15:20 2040
15:22 and so we just whatever what we sort of
15:24 anticipated what will be
15:26 billed at what time and by that time it
15:27 should be completely built out
15:29 okay um i think that it's
15:32 hard um when you first sent out these
15:35 housing numbers to us a couple months
15:36 ago
15:36 right we had a dialogue back and forth
15:38 and to be blunt about
15:40 it it's hard to see us hit
15:43 our housing target so forcefully so well
15:46 as compared to our jobs numbers right
15:48 even taking out the pandemic at being
15:50 around 53
15:52 they're not on pace with each other and
15:54 as we negotiate our next round
15:57 of housing projections and looking what
15:58 sister cities in our region
16:00 came in at at their last projections
16:03 right it's um it's hard to
16:05 think that a pat on the back of a gold
16:07 star is all we're gonna get right
16:08 there's um there's something about
16:11 looking at these numbers
16:12 and seeing um that well we obviously
16:16 can't affect where people want to live
16:18 and we're happy to be a community that
16:20 is so desirable
16:21 how is it that we're able to put into
16:24 perspective how easily we hit this
16:26 target
16:26 and concerns about keeping up with
16:28 community services right um
16:30 so uh it definitely gave me pause when
16:33 you first looked at a couple months ago
16:34 and you sent it around
16:36 um and i think that it's certainly worth
16:40 noting
16:40 that there's um
16:43 i don't i don't have a problem right now
16:46 but i have a feeling that there are
16:48 problems coming if that makes sense
16:50 right when we're so easily hitting our
16:52 housing numbers
16:53 how um you know i'm excited to be able
16:55 to get you know rate surveys on how
16:57 we're keeping up with
16:58 um you know fire and rescue water police
17:01 you know
17:01 schools right you know it starts to
17:03 really bring home
17:04 that if we're hitting this so easily we
17:06 need to be anticipating
17:09 those um growth in other areas if that
17:11 makes sense
17:12 no it does um so this is a conversation
17:15 that council wants to have
17:17 and when we talked about the targets
17:18 with them uh they wanted to come back
17:21 and have a discussion about growth and
17:24 meeting the infrastructure needs for all
17:25 of that growth and no matter what our
17:27 targets are our targets right now are
17:28 proposed target to the lowest out there
17:31 they're i think still at 3 500 and jobs
17:34 are very low as well
17:35 and much lower than they were last time
17:39 and no matter what our target is though
17:41 we have to prepare the infrastructure
17:43 because
17:44 people are going to come if our target
17:45 was a thousand more than a thousand
17:47 people are gonna come here
17:48 um we just need to be able to manage it
17:50 you're right the infrastructure plan for
17:52 thank you
17:57 any other questions yes one question
18:01 from
18:01 commissioner milligan hi commissioner
18:05 milligan here it's a comment and i just
18:07 want to get back to plan release and i
18:09 understand now what i've missed in the
18:11 lakeside numbers i keep forgetting that
18:12 the apartments on the
18:14 uh northeast side of highlands drive are
18:17 part of the lakeside development
18:18 agreement and i had forgotten that
18:20 because they're just so out of sync with
18:22 the rest of it
18:23 so thank you for um pointing me that way
18:26 thanks
18:28 okay ready to move on
18:32 okay thank you
18:35 so next we're going to talk about the
18:37 milano reset redesignation
18:39 and rezone request so what you're
18:41 looking at
18:42 is the property this is newport way
18:44 right here and there's a single family
18:46 house and a
18:47 detached garage behind it
18:51 and here's an air oops here's an aerial
18:53 review
18:55 an aerial view of where it's located
18:57 here's the site
18:58 the house the garage and newport way
19:01 right here
19:04 so the request is it's a it's a 0.81
19:08 acre parcel
19:09 and the request is to change the land
19:11 use designation from low density
19:13 residential to multi-family residential
19:15 and to change the zoning from
19:16 single-family suburban to multi-family
19:19 media
19:22 so here's what's adjacent to you've got
19:24 a single-family house here
19:27 you have single-family zoning here with
19:30 spyglass
19:30 townhomes or condominiums next on that
19:33 property
19:34 single-family suburban over here with
19:36 open space and then single family homes
19:38 back in here
19:39 these two properties are tracks open
19:42 space tracks owned by
19:44 this hoa multi-family medium up here
19:47 these are the bentley house condominiums
19:49 and to the east you have revel which was
19:51 just constructed it's village
19:53 residential
19:54 you have revel and then anthology
19:56 anthology in here and
19:57 riva as well you also have and you'll
20:01 see it in a minute a creek
20:03 coming through this property as well
20:06 the critical areas approximately 75
20:09 percent of this site is encumbered by
20:10 critical areas
20:12 and the dark purple that you see here
20:14 are the 40 percent steep slopes they're
20:17 or 40 grade or steeper and then they
20:20 have 50 percent
20:21 buffers that are required with those
20:23 there's also schneider creek that runs
20:26 adjacent to it and it has a 100 foot
20:27 buffer that bumps into this property as
20:29 well
20:30 everything that you see in white becomes
20:32 the developable property
20:37 so for the design standards single
20:40 families is a comparison between the two
20:43 um the densities you go from 4.5 to
20:47 14.5 minimum lot size from 9 600 to 2500
20:52 front step back 20 to 10 feet side
20:55 setbacks are
20:56 about the same rear set back actually
20:57 goes from 10 to 20 feet
20:59 and then impervious goes up to 50
21:02 percent
21:03 and um the base building height is 50
21:07 40 feet and three feet for single family
21:09 which left as high as it can go
21:11 but then the multi-family medium can go
21:13 up to 50 feet with
21:15 conditions
21:18 and when you look at reasons you can't
21:19 just look i know that
21:21 with the property owner is proposing 11
21:25 on homes for rental townhomes to go on
21:27 the site but you can't just look at
21:29 what's proposed i mean for one a an
21:31 application has not been submitted you
21:33 need to look at
21:34 everything that can go on that property
21:36 so these are very similar
21:38 um what can go on these um except that
21:41 you get to multi-family structures which
21:43 are not allowed
21:44 in single family suburban and then you
21:47 get done here you've got a neighborhood
21:48 scale grocery store would be allowed
21:50 neighborhood and residential scale
21:52 office professional and financial uses
21:54 day care centers and professional
21:56 grooming services
21:57 would be allowed
22:02 access when we took the city council on
22:04 the docket access was a big concern for
22:06 them
22:08 um should be um
22:11 so this is newport way right here and
22:13 currently
22:14 there is an easement that goes across
22:16 the spy glass condominium property
22:19 and um the property owner was correct in
22:22 a letter that was sent i
22:24 said it was 10 feet that was our
22:25 understanding but i believe that it's
22:27 closer to 25 feet wide here
22:29 but that is the access season our street
22:32 standard section y
22:33 says that access would preferably
22:36 come from a quieter street but i'm going
22:39 to call it a quieter street
22:42 and so i said that that is something
22:44 that probably needs to be explored if
22:46 this were to be approved or if other
22:47 access is needed however
22:49 this property is owned by the hoa so it
22:52 is dependent on
22:53 a conversation with them access this way
22:56 is potentially possible but because
22:58 there's no project has been submitted
23:00 it's it's hard to tell how that would
23:02 work although there has been
23:04 conversation about write and write out
23:06 but
23:06 as you know newport way has recently had
23:09 a new read
23:10 been redesigned and some changes might
23:12 need to be made if that were the case
23:17 so our recommendation right now is to
23:19 not recommend
23:20 approval of the request to change the
23:22 landis designation to multi-family
23:24 residential and the zoning to
23:25 multi-family medium
23:26 for a few reasons first of all there are
23:29 nine criteria
23:31 in imc 1804 632 d3
23:34 um that an applicant must meet all of
23:37 these
23:38 and one is number two rezone bears a
23:41 substantial relation to the
23:42 public health safety welfare or other
23:44 community benefit
23:46 and the proposed rezone does not have
23:48 any public health safety welfare or
23:50 community benefits
23:52 that would come with it
23:56 the reason was warranted because of
23:57 changed circumstances
23:59 there have not been any changed
24:00 circumstances
24:02 to this property um that would
24:05 constitute a reason and the reason
24:09 request is consistent with the
24:10 comprehensive plan or is in the
24:12 concurrent process of comprehensive plan
24:14 redesignation
24:15 so yes there is a concurrent request
24:19 for a redesignation to multi-family
24:21 medium to match the zoning change
24:23 but there are also policies existing in
24:25 the comprehensive plan
24:27 that this does not can conform to
24:31 one is land use policy c2 which says
24:34 focus future growth in areas with no
24:36 or minimal environmentally critical
24:38 areas and with this property being
24:40 encumbered with 75
24:42 critical areas it doesn't make sense and
24:44 then
24:45 induced goal k says focus and promote
24:47 office housing and retail development in
24:49 the urban core regional growth center
24:51 there is plenty as we just talked about
24:53 plenty of capacity
24:54 in the urban core to accommodate housing
24:57 and we don't need
24:58 additional density outside of the urban
25:00 core
25:02 so that is uh those are the amendments
25:05 are there any question i'll finish real
25:06 quick and we can
25:07 go on a timeline is same as it was last
25:10 time we're going to continue looking at
25:11 these through august
25:15 and in september and then in september
25:17 and october we're going to hold a public
25:18 hearing and there will be a
25:19 recommendation
25:20 november 9th it goes to a council study
25:23 session and on december 6 the council is
25:24 expected to take action
25:26 the next time you will see a topic it
25:28 will be the final topic for
25:30 comprehensive plan amendments is august
25:32 12th when we will talk about climate
25:33 change policies
25:35 that is all i have if you have any
25:36 questions
25:38 happy to chat
25:45 kristen i do have questions i'm waiting
25:47 for other commissioners here
25:52 okay uh i don't see any questions so i
25:55 do have a question
25:57 the property that's across the street is
25:59 there any discussion
26:00 about redeveloping that property
26:03 yes actually the property owner who owns
26:05 this property owns the property across
26:07 the
26:09 you want to street this into a parking
26:10 lot because they want to develop that
26:12 right he's proposing a hundred unit
26:15 complex i don't know if it's apartments
26:16 or condominiums
26:17 and yes the proposal it hasn't been
26:20 approved yet but the proposal would be
26:21 to use this
26:22 this site that we're talking about as
26:24 construction part parking and lay down
26:26 for construction materials
26:28 okay now if this owner
26:31 focusing back on the lot the word topic
26:34 tonight
26:35 if this owner was to purchase from the
26:38 hoa
26:39 the triangle section that's missing
26:41 basically where their easement
26:43 is and got that access to the road
26:47 would they would the city change its
26:51 position from not recommend
26:54 development to recommend development
26:57 provided that the
26:58 development does not impact
27:04 the
27:06 um sorry my dogs are barking i just
27:09 lost my chain of thought
27:12 the encumbered areas so
27:15 no not at this time because in order to
27:18 be approved
27:19 the applicant has to meet all nine of
27:20 the criteria that are listed in
27:22 the code and that even even with that
27:25 access that doesn't happen
27:28 okay all right thank you uh looks like
27:31 we have a question from
27:33 uh commissioner milligan oh sorry we
27:36 need to back up we have a question or
27:40 yeah a question from commissioner lewis
27:42 first
27:45 thank you chair fall commissioner joy
27:47 lewis so if i'm understanding the
27:49 numbers correct right now the proposal
27:51 for the 11 town homes is on 25
27:53 of the property a 75 is
27:56 uh considered unbuildable is that
27:58 correct yes yes
28:00 um and right and right now that's him
28:03 building
28:04 up to the maximum amount of buildable
28:06 space with the required mandatory
28:08 buffers
28:10 yes yes keep in mind this is something
28:12 that city hasn't had a chance to review
28:14 because no project has been submitted
28:16 okay um thank you and then that the
28:19 parking component was something that i
28:20 was a little confused about
28:21 especially when um the mentioning of
28:23 like the lay down for materials
28:25 is there any type of review that ends up
28:27 happening for these particularly
28:28 critical areas
28:30 um when going through that request for
28:33 the site plan
28:34 um and then is that something that goes
28:36 through council or is that something
28:37 that goes to administration
28:39 there is a review that happens i talked
28:40 to the planner on that project today
28:43 and it the review hasn't happened yet
28:45 but it's to protect critical areas
28:47 that's what it's for it does not go to
28:48 city council okay so it's just an
28:50 administration review
28:51 okay um and uh
28:54 so that's kind of separate right it's
28:56 just kind of ancillary knowledge for us
28:58 it's not really yeah
28:59 anything um has there been any response
29:02 from the hoa
29:03 right now on the proposal
29:06 not from the hoa itself but
29:09 i have heard from a president who lives
29:11 in the neighborhood at least one that i
29:13 am aware of
29:14 um thank you very much you're welcome
29:22 okay and thank you very much
29:23 commissioner lewis we have a question
29:25 from
29:26 commissioner milligan thank you chair
29:29 fall this is commissioner milligan
29:31 planner leasing i wanted to ask about
29:33 cluster housing that's
29:35 allowed on um encumbered properties by
29:38 critical areas and
29:40 i just need a little refresher on that
29:41 and whether the
29:44 zoning density would allow
29:47 for any more of that anyway
29:50 considering it's four and a half used
29:53 per acre and it's not even
29:54 an acre so
29:58 it would allow for cluster housing and
30:00 you and
30:01 like you i need a little refresher but
30:03 you can you look at what would be
30:04 allowed on the entire parcel
30:06 and you're allowed to bring some of that
30:07 over into cluster housing and make
30:09 smaller lots
30:10 you still have to have things like open
30:12 space and there are some setbacks
30:14 you know critical areas but you can get
30:16 more housing on a property that
30:21 okay way and i have one last question i
30:23 mean i don't see any other additional
30:25 questions from other commissioners
30:27 this particular house built in 1902 or
30:30 1903
30:31 uh it seems to be a rather unique house
30:34 and
30:36 eclectic if
30:39 the developer was proposing to
30:43 redevelop the property either high
30:46 density or
30:47 put another unit uh another house on
30:50 there
30:51 would there be any interest would the
30:54 city have any interest
30:55 in trying to move the house to another
30:58 lot to
30:58 save that particular house
31:02 maybe like a relocation into old town
31:08 so this kind of thing has come up before
31:10 and it's it's a city council decision
31:13 and yeah um so i don't know what their
31:16 answer would be
31:17 but you'd have to find land on which to
31:20 locate
31:21 the house which is expensive unless it
31:23 gets donated and then moving the house
31:25 is expensive and then you need to figure
31:26 out how it's going to be used is it
31:28 going to be purchased by
31:29 a residential you know for somebody to
31:32 live in
31:33 or is it going to be commercial who's
31:34 going to own it after that so
31:36 um short answer i i don't know if they
31:39 would consider that but there are a lot
31:40 of things to be considered if that
31:42 was something they wanted to do okay
31:46 thank you i see no additional questions
31:53 okay um i think
31:57 what i really need to do then is to go
32:00 back and look at the numbers
32:02 from a few years ago and see exactly
32:04 what we looked at and what
32:05 considerations were made during that
32:06 and i'll bring that back to you all next
32:08 time when we talk about
32:11 capacity is that is that my homework
32:15 is that all that i have okay
32:18 all right thank you all
32:24 okay uh so it looks like next thing on
32:26 the agenda is title 18
32:28 update and tracking of public comments
32:32 vinnie daly wall er your community
32:34 planning and development director will
32:35 be presenting a plan for tracking
32:37 responding and presenting public
32:40 comments
32:42 um i do have one quick question do you
32:44 want to ask for public comment
32:46 or do you want to wait until the end uh
32:50 let's open it for public comment in
32:52 regards to the uh
32:54 okay 2021 amendments
32:58 okay um i do know that we have a few
33:00 people here if you would like to speak
33:02 right now would you please there are two
33:04 topics tonight so some of you said you
33:06 wanted to speak and i'm not sure which
33:07 topic but if you'd like to speak would
33:08 you please
33:10 raise your electronic hand or if you
33:11 can't figure out how to do it how to do
33:13 that send a note to me
33:14 in the chat i'll give you i'll give you
33:17 a minute to do that
33:35 i believe okay um i think susan neville
33:39 just raised her hand let me
33:41 i'm gonna make you a panelist
33:49 you're now unmuted miss neville okay
33:51 thank you
33:52 you're welcome hello everyone i'm a long
33:54 time resident my name is susan deville
33:57 of issaquah and i do happen to live
34:00 in the pinecone tierra highlands
34:03 um development which is right next to
34:05 that milano
34:06 that you were just discussing so um
34:10 i believe someone from the development
34:12 committee wrote in
34:13 so there is a letter in your packet and
34:16 there's also a letter from me
34:17 so i just wanted to make that note
34:20 before i started in
34:21 on the title update update
34:24 for public tracking uh
34:29 i wanted to thank the administration for
34:31 putting this together
34:33 and and also for
34:36 all the times they've spent trying to
34:39 include the public in this whole process
34:42 and i did send in a letter regarding the
34:44 discussion
34:45 but i really wanted to reiterate a few
34:46 points to consider
34:48 before the final approval is done
34:52 tonight
34:52 and one of them is to confirm that the
34:55 public comment notes
34:57 will be traveling or included in all the
35:00 information
35:02 being passed through the channels such
35:05 as when it goes to city council work
35:07 sessions
35:08 and all other committees and then my
35:11 second
35:14 concern was can the public
35:18 questions on a particular section be
35:21 answered before the document moves to
35:23 the next
35:24 review phase and for example i used
35:28 like on the section for natural
35:31 environment labeled n1
35:33 before this document goes to console
35:36 study work session
35:38 will the response note be more
35:39 specifically answered
35:42 um i i realized this was just put
35:45 together
35:46 in a short time and the majority of the
35:49 responses so far
35:50 are listed as under review but um
35:54 oh and another example was the master
35:56 builders association
35:58 had a answer called incorporated
36:02 response
36:03 and i that's because they have sent in
36:05 some ordinances and local housing links
36:08 so i was wondering if when during your
36:09 discussion if you would talk about the
36:11 differences
36:12 between these two responses and um
36:15 maybe what other comment or responses we
36:18 will be seeing
36:20 as we move along and those were the
36:23 two um only items i was not really clear
36:27 and again thank you for all your efforts
36:29 so far for everybody
36:30 that they put into this thank you
36:42 i do have one other uh who would like to
36:45 speak
36:46 it's i'm uh hussein korem
36:49 who is the property owner for milano and
36:52 i am going to make you a
36:54 presenter now what does that make you a
36:56 panelist
36:58 all right you are unmuted and you can
37:00 turn on your camera too if you'd like
37:02 oh okay how do i do that so
37:05 okay oh there we go
37:08 oh there we go
37:11 thank you thank you for having me
37:13 commissioners i thought i would never
37:15 get this right but i did just the last
37:17 minute so
37:18 god must have intervened i'm thankful
37:22 for kristen's
37:22 uh you know nice directions anyhow
37:25 my name is hussein koram i send this
37:28 thing uh
37:29 on the email to the commissioners and
37:31 and the city council
37:33 i am mistakenly identified involved with
37:36 the city council so my apologies
37:38 i would resend it tomorrow to the
37:40 commissioners
37:41 uh i'm a i'm a small builder i'm bored
37:44 for boeing
37:45 i work for the military and then i
37:47 started my own construction company
37:49 development
37:50 and this reason request is uh
37:54 and again it this is this is something
37:56 that does not have to be done
37:59 i want to bring this idea up here that i
38:01 think is a great idea
38:03 to develop some middle-income housing
38:07 in issaquah city of issaquah
38:10 concentrating their their development
38:13 in the downtown core area or the
38:17 central new sequoia area which is high
38:19 density
38:20 it's not cost is cost prohibited to have
38:25 medium income houses like town homes or
38:28 smaller homes in that area
38:29 so this may be a perfect solution only
38:32 if the city wants
38:34 well one of the benefits of the
38:35 development is right now these
38:38 anybody from the street could walk to
38:39 that stream and
38:41 basically interfere with uh environment
38:44 the fish habitat
38:45 wants to develop we basically close up
38:48 that area
38:49 we're proposing to do the street
38:51 frontage uh which is something
38:52 which doesn't exist right now uh i
38:55 almost hit a driver a biker
38:57 when i was driving there one day so
39:00 there are benefits that goes with that
39:02 the overall size of the building is a
39:04 little bit a little bit
39:06 bigger a little bit bigger uh from a
39:09 single family
39:10 the footprint doesn't vary a whole lot
39:12 it's just more units but what it does
39:14 i think it provides a a housing
39:17 opportunity
39:18 for middle-income people um what
39:22 happened
39:22 in city of issaquah the the the if you
39:25 look at the pamphlet
39:26 or the document that i send you 25.1
39:31 uh the housing cost increased
39:34 in the past 12 months 25.1
39:38 the the rental market is the most
39:41 expensive in city of issaquah
39:43 uh in all the municipalities that that
39:46 was in that study
39:47 so if we continue doing things
39:51 of the past then what's gonna happen to
39:53 the younger people what's
39:55 to happen to my kids i've got kids at 22
39:58 and 24
39:59 they want to buy a house i think buying
40:01 a house is going to be a dream for these
40:02 people
40:03 so what i'm saying is just let's look at
40:05 this with an open mind
40:07 is there any way we can protect the
40:09 community
40:10 is there any way we can address the
40:12 neighbors you know
40:14 concerns if there's any way that we can
40:16 protect the environment
40:18 by closing it off right now it's open
40:20 and if there's any way we can
40:21 serve the younger families the people
40:24 and you know the demographics have
40:26 changed there are a lot more immigrants
40:28 right now
40:29 people like me moving into issaquah
40:31 because of the job market
40:33 these people have you know in-laws
40:34 living with them they can't fit in a
40:36 two-bedroom apartment
40:38 a one-bedroom apartment in central
40:39 visakwa and building
40:41 one across the street uh is zoned for
40:44 that 101 units
40:46 there's just you can't build
40:47 middle-income housing is too expensive
40:49 it would not work
40:50 so you just have to be creative i'm
40:53 doing
40:54 i'm doing a job in city of redmond and
40:56 city of edwin is actually considering
40:59 out of the box to do some spot results
41:03 with the consent of the neighbors and
41:04 the community
41:06 uh and the environment uh protecting
41:08 that to
41:09 to uh along the arteries so just think
41:13 out the box
41:14 just an idea if i get a no i'll
41:17 break my heart a little bit but i'll
41:18 leave over it but i think the community
41:21 is going to be the winning thing that's
41:22 what we need to consider the days and
41:24 are we serving the public
41:26 at 21.1 price increase in one year
41:30 thank you
41:45 is there anyone else who would like to
41:46 speak
41:48 one more minute
41:57 no i don't see any oh i we go
42:01 geraldine kerry would like to speak so
42:03 geraldine i'm going to make you a
42:04 panelist
42:06 and unmute you you're unmuted and if
42:10 you'd like to turn on your camera you
42:11 can do that as well
42:13 i'll pass on the camera thank you um
42:17 i'm a long time resident on newport way
42:21 sr 900 i've been here 43 years and i've
42:24 seen a lot of change to newport way
42:27 i i was um i had a long
42:31 well in my mind i had a long comment on
42:34 the planning policy commission if they
42:36 were in favor of
42:38 rezoning this property as multi-family
42:42 but i see for the most part you are
42:45 saying this property cannot be rezoned
42:48 because it does not meet
42:50 nine at least nine or ten of the uh
42:53 conditions
42:54 and um how what changes
42:58 that in those nine conditions
43:01 that you would or somebody in the city
43:04 council would recommend that this
43:06 property be
43:07 rezoned multi-family
43:10 um i'm i'm curious i'm i'm glad to be
43:13 in on the groundwork of this property
43:16 being rezoned because a lot of times
43:18 things happen and then five years six
43:21 years out
43:22 we see things going on and the city says
43:24 it happened way way back when
43:27 so i'm glad that the city is allowing
43:30 residents to have input on what is
43:33 happening along newport way which i feel
43:36 is being over
43:38 planned and over will be so
43:41 um congested with all the development
43:44 that
43:44 i'm not i'm not in favor of seeing this
43:47 property rezoned
43:48 but i applaud your efforts and your
43:51 considerations
43:52 and hope that the city officials see
43:55 this
43:56 property at to to remain single-family
44:00 so i thank you
44:05 thank you
44:13 those were all of the attendees
44:16 there's no one else to speak okay
44:19 thank you kristen i will go ahead and
44:21 close public comment
44:23 at 7 15 for the proposed 2021
44:28 comprehensive plan amendments and land
44:29 use tables and milano redesignation
44:32 rezone request we'll open public comment
44:35 again
44:36 after the discussions for title 18
44:38 update and tracking our public comments
44:43 minnie go ahead the floor is yours
44:47 thank you chair uh good evening
44:49 commissioners
44:50 so uh what we wanted to share with you
44:52 was um
44:53 just and get your input on um what our
44:56 thoughts are of tracking uh
44:58 public comments because title 18 update
45:01 is going to be
45:03 a year and a half long process we want
45:05 to make sure that we
45:06 um you know as we start rolling into uh
45:09 some of the topics that we are tracking
45:11 them
45:12 and uh there is a feedback loop with the
45:14 community comments that that are coming
45:16 so our um what we included in the packet
45:20 was um to categorize those comments by
45:23 the six
45:24 topic areas that uh we're going to be
45:26 talking to you about
45:27 um so we've shared with you the schedule
45:30 broken it up into six
45:32 main groups each group has multiple
45:35 topics but
45:36 um but we're thinking we would take the
45:39 public comments that come in we divide
45:41 them into those six
45:42 groups we keep track of them and then
45:45 when
45:46 uh we bring in the first draft of the
45:48 code amendments
45:49 for a public hearing on each of those
45:51 six groups
45:53 um that we would have a more
45:54 comprehensive uh last column filled in
45:58 so um you know for if for instance if it
46:00 was natural environment we
46:02 received some comments um we would
46:04 review them
46:05 uh come up with a staff's uh
46:07 recommendation of how to
46:08 include them in the first draft and then
46:11 when you hold the public hearing in the
46:12 first draft we would have
46:14 you know this was incorporated and in
46:17 this section
46:18 or this was noted but no changes were
46:21 made to the code language for these
46:23 reasons
46:24 so some kind of a complete response
46:27 would be included when we have the
46:29 public hearing on each of those six
46:31 groups
46:32 um and and in the meantime we'll
46:34 continue to
46:35 maintain this matrix of all the comments
46:38 that are coming in
46:40 the other part i think that we've heard
46:42 uh from the public comments tonight
46:45 and and previously is that if there are
46:48 questions
46:48 asked during the public comments um then
46:51 staff will uh
46:52 try and answer those questions during
46:54 their presentation for that each topic
46:57 so if there's an agenda item for peop
46:59 for your consideration
47:01 and comments come in some of them are
47:03 questions we will try to incorporate the
47:06 the answers to those questions in our
47:07 presentation so that everyone has the
47:09 the same information or an answer to
47:11 that uh that question
47:13 including the public and all the
47:15 commissioners um
47:16 so that's our thought process in this we
47:18 just wanted to see if you had
47:20 uh additional ideas you want us to to to
47:23 incorporate
47:24 or if this will work um so that that's
47:27 all we were looking for some feedback on
47:29 that
47:36 it will open up to commissioner
47:38 questions
47:47 mr milligan has a comment yep uh
47:49 commissioner milligan go ahead as far as
47:51 yours
47:52 thank you chair fall this is
47:53 commissioner mill again and thank you
47:55 director dollywall i just wanted to
47:57 comment how much i appreciate
47:59 the design and thought that's gone into
48:03 the records and there was a particular
48:06 detail that i liked
48:07 so i wanted to point it out as
48:10 reinforcement
48:11 and that was that sometimes the public
48:13 comment comes in
48:15 by way of an email or even in person
48:18 and it has many different topics and in
48:21 the
48:22 example that you showed in our packet
48:24 you um made an effort to split out those
48:27 topics because so that they could be
48:29 addressed even though they were in
48:31 the same communication so i i just want
48:35 to say i want to appreciate that
48:37 organization i think it's very helpful
48:39 thank you
48:42 thank you commissioner milligan and
48:44 commissioner lewis here's a question
48:47 thank you commissioner joy lewis um i
48:50 really appreciate
48:51 that um there's a way for interested
48:54 parties to be able to confirm that
48:55 comments have been received you know
48:56 it's typical
48:57 uh when council gets something um the
49:00 council member hunt you know will reply
49:02 and say we received it so i love having
49:04 this
49:04 this framework for people to kind of
49:06 know that their thoughts haven't just
49:08 gone into the ether
49:09 um but i do really want to sharpen in
49:13 on this as a tool for being able to
49:16 facilitate dialogue
49:17 um you know when we um when we ask
49:20 questions and we get answers it often
49:21 just brings more questions
49:23 and right now that um this response
49:26 notes tool that we've that's been
49:27 created isn't really doing that
49:30 right so having everything be kind of a
49:33 pending response
49:35 i see as being problematic maybe there's
49:38 something where
49:39 um a respondent is asking a question
49:41 about something that
49:42 aligns to a timeline there can be like
49:45 an eta like expect
49:46 a response on this when we you know in
49:49 in july or however a response to when dr
49:51 when um staff is going to be creating
49:53 those drafts and things like that so
49:54 people kind of know when to anticipate
49:57 i'm not sure if that's a good response
49:59 um to
50:00 my concern or but i think what you had
50:02 mentioned was basically answers were
50:04 going to be in the presentation
50:05 and i i initially i didn't like that um
50:09 that idea because i don't think it
50:11 facilitates us being able to really have
50:13 as many eyes and thoughts and
50:15 um to really make our best our best
50:17 effort at this
50:18 and so i'm hoping that we can continue
50:20 the work on
50:21 these response notes in a way that
50:24 allows people to be able to look up and
50:26 see oh i had that question too what was
50:27 it that staff said right
50:29 um in some way being able to communicate
50:32 we're still working on this but right
50:34 now this is what we're thinking
50:35 or you know what we have we thank you
50:38 for your response and we'll think we're
50:39 going to have a response for you
50:41 in around the october time frame or you
50:43 know what i mean so in some way to be
50:45 able to communicate
50:46 and then when that time comes to say
50:49 this is
50:49 what um our response is with the
50:52 administrative responses
50:54 and for people to be able to see that
50:55 right not just the person who asked the
50:57 question
50:57 so in the same way that you're including
50:59 people's emails or were able to get a
51:01 much more detailed response
51:03 than um as well in the response notes of
51:05 saying
51:06 this is what it is to be able to update
51:07 people before it's too late right before
51:10 we've um looked at the draft and passed
51:13 our pass our opinions along to council
51:16 right how do we use this as a tool that
51:17 people
51:18 are able to say oh well that kind of led
51:20 me to think about this or that and so i
51:22 would encourage
51:23 this to kind of um think about the the
51:25 next steps right
51:26 this is a great first way of um
51:29 kind of corralling um all of these
51:32 comments and chatter that we really
51:34 appreciate having so early on
51:36 um and so yeah i don't know that i have
51:39 i have great answers but i have a couple
51:41 suggestions but i um
51:43 but i do want to kind of be um continue
51:46 to figure out how do we
51:48 use this as a tool for community members
51:50 not only to feel heard
51:51 but to continue that dialogue right to
51:53 be able to have um
51:55 when our people are having a direct
51:56 message to staff that this then means
51:58 that we're able to
51:59 keep um use this pool of interested
52:02 parties to be able to then um
52:04 invite them for direct events for
52:06 instance right like i love that
52:07 in the tool of being able to say like
52:09 how did we receive this response right
52:10 we haven't had any events yet so
52:12 obviously that column was blank
52:13 but um being able to um to see kind of
52:17 how are we interacting and how are we
52:18 continuing to have
52:20 really valid input that's coming in so
52:22 thank you
52:26 thank you commissioner lewis and we have
52:29 a question from
52:29 commissioner boehner
52:33 yeah hi sarah bader here um
52:36 i also like the table um i had a couple
52:40 kind of common slash quasi questions
52:43 um about it and about specifically the
52:46 how do
52:47 community members kind of feel heard and
52:48 acknowledged as part of this and i think
52:50 the table goes a long
52:52 way um my first question is
52:55 or comment i guess is that there's
52:57 already a lot here
52:59 and we're you know only a couple of
53:00 weeks into this um and so
53:02 as we look a year out um how do we
53:05 sort or filter um you know or combine
53:10 you know themes or everything that's
53:12 being emerged in here so that we're
53:13 continuing to kind of remember what's
53:14 being
53:15 has been talked about um as this list
53:18 grows and grows and grows
53:19 um so that's one comment and then the
53:21 other um
53:23 is and i think you touched on this um
53:26 in your and your comments was around i
53:28 used to be this is
53:29 some random background but i used to be
53:31 a planner in a different country um
53:33 way back in the in the day and we used
53:36 to have to prepare
53:37 reports for um we call them committees
53:40 there and um as part of those reports we
53:44 had to summarize
53:45 kind of public comments that were like
53:48 um sent in
53:49 and so i wonder if there's an
53:51 opportunity i think you you mentioned
53:52 that
53:53 this might be part of the report in my
53:54 again my couple of weeks being part of
53:57 this commission i've noticed that
53:58 the comments come in after the agendas
54:00 are posted and the packets are posted so
54:02 that might be kind of a moot point
54:03 anyway but maybe in your presentations
54:05 or in
54:06 supplemental materials or whatever but i
54:08 think um acknowledging them kind of
54:09 formally um
54:10 you know relevant comments too to the
54:13 topic at hand i think would be
54:15 would go a long way as well to making
54:17 people feel hurt and also making sure
54:18 that we're
54:19 kind of considering their comments um
54:20 appropriately as well as we
54:22 as we discuss this and then the final
54:25 thing which might not be
54:26 appropriate for this conversation but is
54:29 just an observation kind of
54:31 generally as i look at um just the names
54:34 there's actually there's a lot of
54:34 comments but not very many names
54:37 which is wonderful that we have you know
54:39 a handful of really really engaged
54:40 residents but
54:42 um to the vein of kind of like nothing
54:44 about me without me um in terms of
54:46 community engagement and getting as much
54:48 feedback as we can given that you know
54:50 we just learned that there's 39 000
54:52 something residents in the city of
54:54 issaquah how
54:55 are we communicating the opportunities
54:57 to provide feedback into this
54:59 um into this process and so
55:02 and i don't know if that's for now or
55:03 just for um you know food for thought
55:05 for later but
55:07 i'm interested in and you know how to
55:09 spread the the word that this process is
55:10 happening
55:11 um so we can hear kind of from diverse
55:13 voices as well
55:15 that's all
55:20 okay and thank you very much
55:22 commissioner vader hi
55:24 kristen i have not seen any additional
55:26 comments or questions
55:30 i'm not either mr monahan
55:33 would you like to have a question
55:38 okay all right uh scene then
55:41 i guess we'll go ahead and move on to
55:46 uh public comments
55:50 we want to open up to uh public comment
55:55 i will see if there's anyone else that
55:57 would like to speak
56:01 uh yes i she still wants to speak let me
56:05 uh gerald and carey
56:11 caroline would you like to speak on this
56:12 topic as well wait a minute wait a
56:14 minute
56:16 what are they talking about
56:28 miss carrie would you like to speak on
56:29 the title 18 topic as well
56:33 no your hand was still up so that's why
56:36 i was asking
56:37 okay oh no okay thank you
56:41 if anyone else would like to speak if
56:43 you could raise your hand or let me know
56:45 in the chat
56:51 i don't see anyone i do believe that
56:53 miss neville addressed some
56:56 issues in her previous comments during
56:59 the
56:59 comprehensive plan topic um i also
57:02 wanted to note
57:04 that we did receive comments from um via
57:07 email from mary lynch
57:09 and from teresa ossel one from teresa
57:12 ossel just came actually after the
57:13 meeting started and i forwarded that on
57:15 to the planning policy commission
57:17 and both were opposed to the reason
57:26 and those will be added to the meeting
57:28 minutes is that correct
57:29 kristen okay yes they will all right so
57:33 uh seeing that we do not have any
57:36 additional
57:37 public comments or questions i'm going
57:39 to go ahead and close public comments at
57:46 that concludes our business for tonight
57:49 and then we're going to move into
57:50 reports
57:51 and city council updates
57:54 kristin i do not have any
57:58 reports minnie do you have any reports
58:00 from city council
58:01 sure um i can talk about sign code
58:04 update
58:04 um so you all finalized your
58:06 recommendation gave
58:08 it to city council we had a study
58:10 session with them
58:11 and they sent it back to title 18 ad hoc
58:14 committee and we've been working with
58:16 them
58:18 to make the code a little bit more
58:20 clearer less
58:22 you know less prescriptive um more clear
58:25 to understand
58:26 and and succinct and and um you know
58:29 improve the readability and clarity and
58:32 so on and so forth so
58:34 we um have um you know gotten really
58:37 good feedback from them
58:38 and we've incorporated their input uh
58:41 that item is scheduled for
58:42 july 27th uh city council study session
58:47 um so after the council study session
58:51 then i think one of the questions today
58:53 at ad hoc committee that came up
58:55 was to check in with all of you to see
58:58 if you wanted
58:59 to have that item come back to you if
59:01 you had
59:02 if you felt strongly about uh you know
59:05 having a second
59:05 look at sign code we can certainly send
59:08 you send it to you by email
59:10 um there may be an option for counsel to
59:12 consider that they would hold the public
59:14 hearing themselves
59:15 on it before adoption that's one option
59:18 or if you all felt strongly we want to
59:21 convey that message to counsel that
59:23 you want to see it back again here given
59:26 all the reading that's ahead of you for
59:29 title 18 update we wanted to be
59:31 sensitive to
59:32 to your time as well so um i told them
59:35 i'll check in with all of you and
59:37 and see if you uh felt had a strong
59:39 opinion on it one way or the other
59:46 okay uh commissioner lewis has a comment
59:50 thank you um i have
59:53 a strong opinion that i would love for
59:56 the public to be able to do this again
59:58 if it works best for their calendar that
1:00:00 we sit with it then obviously we're
1:00:01 happy to serve
1:00:03 i don't have a um i don't from where i'm
1:00:05 sitting as a commissioner i don't have a
1:00:06 need to re
1:00:07 um to look at this again um however we
1:00:09 had fantastic
1:00:11 involvement from the community on this
1:00:12 process um
1:00:14 with meetings with um development
1:00:16 commissioner we had we had so much good
1:00:17 feedback so
1:00:18 i would love to encourage that there is
1:00:20 um the if the council is willing to hold
1:00:22 another
1:00:22 a public hearing to be able to get um
1:00:25 updated voices
1:00:26 on this um new direction an update i
1:00:29 would highly encourage
1:00:30 um but as far as where i'm sitting i
1:00:32 don't know but we necessarily need to
1:00:35 take another dive into it
1:00:41 to commission blues uh any other
1:00:43 additional comments or questions
1:00:45 there's a sign code
1:00:49 so many i think we're good with it great
1:00:51 thank you
1:00:54 and so that concludes our reports
1:00:57 now we're going to go ahead and move on
1:00:58 to other business and announcements
1:01:01 and kristin do you have any comments for
1:01:02 the upcoming schedule
1:01:04 i just wanted to note that i forgot to
1:01:07 put the july 15 tour on your schedule
1:01:09 however you all did receive a meeting
1:01:11 notice for it today
1:01:13 um i want to make sure we're going to
1:01:15 have a quorum right now the only person
1:01:16 that i know that won't be there is
1:01:18 commissioner voice
1:01:19 if you um and some of you have responded
1:01:23 already but if there's anyone who won't
1:01:24 be here if you could let me know
1:01:26 summer is a we only have seven members
1:01:28 and summer is busy so i'm trying to make
1:01:29 sure we keep our quorums
1:01:31 commissioner lewis i i sent you an email
1:01:34 a couple weeks ago i will
1:01:36 i will unfortunately not be available
1:01:38 but i appreciate that you offered to put
1:01:39 a gopro on and record the whole thing
1:01:41 for me
1:01:45 i knew you i thought you were one of
1:01:46 them i couldn't find that email that i
1:01:47 do have the other day
1:01:48 okay all right yeah and i'm happy you
1:01:51 know if if
1:01:52 uh the 15 doesn't work for one or two of
1:01:54 you i'm happy to do that some other day
1:01:56 that works for you during the daytime or
1:01:58 in the evening so you let me know
1:02:00 we can do a redo of this one absolutely
1:02:04 and chris and i uh replied back to your
1:02:06 meeting invite as
1:02:07 tentative because say an iffy date so
1:02:12 if we can move we've got three
1:02:15 commissioner two commissioners are not
1:02:16 gonna be there for sure
1:02:18 myself would be possibly a third one
1:02:22 if we can move the date i think it might
1:02:24 be great if we could move the date
1:02:31 i know well it's it's summer and it's
1:02:34 busy um and i know we want to get this
1:02:38 done early but i'm going to leave this
1:02:40 one up to
1:02:41 minnie yeah when the notice has gone out
1:02:45 um right yeah it's going to get
1:02:46 published and there's a whole
1:02:48 protocol about the the open public
1:02:50 meeting act and publishing so
1:02:52 we can you know we can split it into
1:02:54 we'll do for the ones that can attend
1:02:57 and then the second meeting if it's less
1:02:59 than three commissioners
1:03:01 then it's not you know then it's not we
1:03:04 don't have to
1:03:04 do the notice and and all that again so
1:03:06 it'll be just a one-on-one
1:03:08 kind of thing uh it won't be a violation
1:03:10 of the open public meeting act and we
1:03:13 cover the three commissioners who miss
1:03:15 it on another date that works for them
1:03:18 excellent okay uh
1:03:22 is that it for uh other business and
1:03:24 announcements
1:03:26 well i had yes and we've already had
1:03:29 public
1:03:30 comments uh unless we want to open
1:03:32 public comments for general
1:03:33 but it's kind of redundant i think
1:03:36 christian
1:03:36 do we have anybody we don't they don't
1:03:39 uh miss carrie
1:03:40 is left but she's already said she
1:03:42 doesn't want to speak so we i believe we
1:03:43 are done with public comment
1:03:45 okay so the next topic is german
1:03:49 everyone's an agreement for our german
1:03:50 then we can join the meeting
1:03:52 at 7 35
1:03:56 pm that's the record one hour
1:03:59 that's incredible that's efficiency from
1:04:02 all of you
1:04:04 thank you all right thank you all for
1:04:07 coming appreciate your time and
1:04:09 have a great evening thank you thank you
1:04:12 thank you everybody

Attendance

Council / Members (7)
Administration/Staff: Ron Faul
Christen Leeson
Senior Planner Sara Bader Minnie Dhaliwal
Director
CP&D Joy Lewis Nina Milligan Matt Monahan Commissioners Not Present: Jason Voiss
(Excused) Richard Zaragoza
Alternate (Excused)