Planning Policy Commission · Thursday, December 7, 2023 · City Council Digest

2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES

Minutes of Nov. 9, 2023

packet pp.3–8

▶ Watch from 0:48 Open packet at p.3 ↗

Staff report:

MINUTES PLANNING POLICY COMMISSION 6:30 p.m. – Thursday, November 9, 2023

Minutes of Nov. 15, 2023

packet pp.9–13

▶ Watch from 1:19 Open packet at p.9 ↗

Staff report:

MINUTES SPECIAL JOINT MEETING PLANNING POLICY (PPC) & ECONOMIC VITALITY (EVC) COMMISSIONS Tibbets Manor 6:00 p.m. – Wednesday, November 15, 2023

4. REGULAR BUSINESS

Comprehensive Plan: SEPA Analysis Scope, (D)

30 min · Stephen Padua, Long Range Planning Manager Sara Diekroeger, Planning Consultant · packet pp.15–18

Topics: Land Use

▶ Watch from 2:04 Open packet at p.15 ↗

Staff report:

The purpose of the December 7, 2023,

Comprehensive Plan: Parks, Recreation, Trails and Open Space, (D)

20 min · Valerie Porter, Associate Planner · packet pp.19–36

Topics: Land UseParks

▶ Watch from 33:47 Open packet at p.19 ↗

Staff report:

The purpose of the December 7, 2023, meeting is to review and discuss the first draft of parks policies for the state required 2024 Comprehensive Plan Periodic Update.

Planning Policy Commission 2024 Draft Work Plan, (D)

30 min · Stephen Padua, Long Range Planning Manager · packet pp.37–39

▶ Watch from 54:56 Open packet at p.37 ↗

Staff report:

Staff Support: Stephen Padua Staff Support: Valerie Porter 7/11/24 7/25/24

5. REPORTS

Council Update

Stephen Padua, Long Range Planning Manager

6. OTHER BUSINESS / ANNOUNCEMENTS

Upcoming Schedule

packet pp.41–43

▶ Watch from 1:26:40 Open packet at p.41 ↗

Staff report:

Planning Policy Commission 2023 Schedule (subject to change) 2023 1/12/23 1/19/23 1/26/23 (Special Meeting) Title 18 – Final Draft Introduction Public Hearing: Title 18 – Final Draft Public Hearing: Title 18 – Final Draft  Part 1 – General Provisions  Part 5 – Specified Use Standards

2096 segments .txt ↗

0:10 ↗ good evening Commissioners staff and

0:13 ↗ welcome to the last planning policy

0:15 ↗ Commission of 2023 I'm glad you could

0:18 ↗ all be with us this

0:19 ↗ evening and tonight we'd like to call

0:22 ↗ the planning policy commission to order

0:24 ↗ and it is currently 6:34 p.m. tonight's

0:28 ↗ meeting is a hybrid meeting the policy

0:30 ↗ commission is in person but staff or

0:32 ↗ members of the public may be attending

0:34 ↗ virtually or in person stepen do we have

0:37 ↗ a quorum this evening chair voice yes

0:39 ↗ you have a quum tonight commissioner

0:41 ↗ altimore is has an excused

0:43 ↗ absence all right thank you our first

0:47 ↗ item of business tonight is to take

0:48 ↗ action to approve the minutes for the

0:50 ↗ November 9th and 15th meet uh PPC

0:54 ↗ meeting assuming that all of you have

0:56 ↗ read your agenda packets are there any

0:59 ↗ concerns regarding the November 9th

1:01 ↗ meeting

1:03 ↗ minute you want

1:06 ↗ typos do we want typos Stephen I'll I'll

1:09 ↗ tell you one

1:11 ↗ later okay good no no no concern okay

1:15 ↗ wonderful thank you dinina uh those

1:18 ↗ meeting minutes are

1:20 ↗ approved also with some

1:23 ↗ typos just one

1:26 ↗ typo uh the same for the November 15th

1:28 ↗ meeting minutes which was joint meeting

1:31 ↗ with the

1:32 ↗ EVC um are there any concerns as far as

1:35 ↗ that set of

1:38 ↗ minutes all right the November 15th

1:40 ↗ meeting minutes are approved our next

1:43 ↗ item of business is public

1:45 ↗ comment and before we get into the rules

1:48 ↗ I'll just ask Stephen if we have anyone

1:50 ↗ who would like to make public comment

1:51 ↗ this

1:52 ↗ evening no one is attending virtually

1:54 ↗ chair voice and looking around the room

1:56 ↗ there is no one in person to give public

1:58 ↗ comment all right thank you

2:01 ↗ Stephen we will skip the boilerplate

2:04 ↗ stuff uh moving on our regular business

2:07 ↗ we have three items under regular

2:09 ↗ business tonight and the first is the

2:11 ↗ sepa analysis scope for the

2:13 ↗ comprehensive plan periodic update Sarah

2:16 ↗ I'm probably going to get this wrong but

2:18 ↗ I'm going to try dick

2:20 ↗ rer dick Roger uh Sarah dick Roger our

2:24 ↗ planning consultant will be presenting

2:26 ↗ tonight so Sarah whenever you're ready

2:28 ↗ please go ahead

2:59 ↗ there we go

3:01 ↗ sorry um we are updating the

3:04 ↗ comprehensive plan and helping with the

3:06 ↗ city's environmental impact statement

3:08 ↗ for that

3:10 ↗ so I can figure out how to change the

3:26 ↗ slide okay so first we're going to start

3:29 ↗ off with the purpose of the presentation

3:31 ↗ tonight so we want to get input from you

3:35 ↗ all on the seos scoping process and also

3:38 ↗ the growth alternative that we are going

3:40 ↗ to be

3:42 ↗ considering so for the agenda first I'll

3:44 ↗ give a just a short brief background on

3:46 ↗ the comprehensive Plan update then I'll

3:48 ↗ go into what is sea what is an

3:52 ↗ Eis what is scoping and then the growth

3:55 ↗ targets that isqua needs to meet the

3:58 ↗ growth alternative that we're

4:00 ↗ considering in the Eis and then also

4:02 ↗ we'll have time for discussion so you

4:04 ↗ all can give your

4:06 ↗ input so I wanted to start with the

4:08 ↗ discussion questions just so you could

4:10 ↗ keep them in mind and you could think

4:12 ↗ about them in the back of your head as

4:13 ↗ we go through the presentation all of

4:15 ↗ them will make a little bit more sense

4:16 ↗ when I explain further but the questions

4:18 ↗ that we want to know your input on are

4:21 ↗ are there any topics not listed which

4:23 ↗ will be listed later that should be

4:25 ↗ addressed in the Eis analysis are there

4:28 ↗ any specific concerns that you all have

4:31 ↗ that should be prioritized in our

4:33 ↗ analysis and then when thinking about

4:35 ↗ the growth

4:36 ↗ Alternatives we are potentially

4:38 ↗ considering using an alternative that is

4:41 ↗ higher than the growth Target so if we

4:43 ↗ were to do that what are some important

4:46 ↗ things to

4:48 ↗ consider so first off just a little bit

4:50 ↗ of background isqua currently updating

4:53 ↗ their comprehensive plan the last Plan

4:56 ↗ update was in

4:58 ↗ 2015 um it's required to update it a

5:01 ↗ large update every 10 years um so we're

5:04 ↗ currently in the process of updating it

5:06 ↗ to help refine the vision and make sure

5:09 ↗ that the comp plan really aligns with

5:11 ↗ the community's goals and

5:14 ↗ values so when you're doing a comp plan

5:17 ↗ update you have to follow sea what is

5:20 ↗ sepa sea stands for the State

5:22 ↗ Environmental Policy Act and sea is a

5:26 ↗ process where you identify and analyze

5:28 ↗ the Environmental impacts that are

5:30 ↗ associated with large decisions large

5:32 ↗ projects and in this case the

5:34 ↗ comprehensive Plan update and the goal

5:37 ↗ really is to identify the environmental

5:39 ↗ impacts and then identify ways to

5:41 ↗ mitigate or

5:43 ↗ reduce so what is an

5:45 ↗ Eis Eis stands for environmental impact

5:49 ↗ statement and as part of cbust part of

5:53 ↗ the State Environmental Policy Act

5:55 ↗ you're required to see if your decision

5:57 ↗ or your project and again in this case

6:00 ↗ the comp plan update has significant

6:02 ↗ enough impacts to need an environmental

6:05 ↗ impact statement in this case that's

6:08 ↗ already been determined we do need to do

6:10 ↗ an environmental impact statement so

6:13 ↗ that is going to be required for the

6:15 ↗ update and this is a large informational

6:18 ↗ document that really lays out all of

6:21 ↗ those environmental impacts that will be

6:24 ↗ happening with the growth and with the

6:26 ↗ update and the plans for different

6:28 ↗ things than the update

6:30 ↗ um again it's used to mitigate those

6:32 ↗ problems so we identify them we analyze

6:34 ↗ them and think about ways that we can

6:37 ↗ reduce or

6:40 ↗ medicate more specifically an Eis

6:43 ↗ includes existing conditions for the

6:46 ↗ city proposed policies and different

6:49 ↗ growth Alternatives so that's where the

6:51 ↗ growth Alternatives come in and I'll

6:52 ↗ talk about that a little more in a

6:54 ↗ minute um it also includes like I said

6:57 ↗ those adverse environmental impacts ways

7:00 ↗ to mitigate them and then any potential

7:02 ↗ unavoidable impacts as

7:06 ↗ well so the topics to be analyzed in the

7:09 ↗ E are very similar to the comp plan

7:13 ↗ element so you'll see the first eight I

7:16 ↗ believe are the same as comprehensive

7:19 ↗ plant elements that isqua is going to

7:21 ↗ have and then the last two are

7:23 ↗ additional topics that we're going to

7:25 ↗ analyze in the Eis the energy and

7:27 ↗ natural resources and also dis

7:30 ↗ so these are the topics that we want to

7:32 ↗ we'll look back at them later during the

7:34 ↗ discussion and talk about whether or not

7:36 ↗ u high have any other ideas for topics

7:39 ↗ that you think should be analyzed during

7:41 ↗ this

7:43 ↗ process so what is scoping we all just

7:46 ↗ came from in a couple of you the scoping

7:49 ↗ meeting that we had with the public and

7:51 ↗ the open house about the comprehensive

7:52 ↗ plan just now over at the community

7:54 ↗ center um but scoping is the first step

7:58 ↗ in cre creating the Eis you have to hold

8:01 ↗ a scoping period it's required to be 30

8:04 ↗ days in this case isqua opened on

8:07 ↗ November 24th and it will be open all

8:09 ↗ the way until January 5th we decided to

8:12 ↗ do a little more than 30 days just

8:13 ↗ because of the holidays to make sure

8:15 ↗ everyone had time to put their input in

8:18 ↗ but the purpose of scoping is to

8:20 ↗ identify all the elements that are going

8:22 ↗ to be evaluated so we have that topics

8:24 ↗ list currently but that's not

8:26 ↗ necessarily set in stone so that's what

8:28 ↗ we want to get your input on

8:30 ↗ and we're going to also gain consensus

8:33 ↗ on the issues that are most significant

8:35 ↗ and then provide that public comment

8:37 ↗ period so that the public and you all

8:39 ↗ can comment on ke environmental issues

8:42 ↗ and

8:44 ↗ concerns next I'm going to talk a little

8:47 ↗ bit about isqua's growth

8:50 ↗ targets so the state Washington sets

8:54 ↗ population projections and therefore

8:57 ↗ growth targets get sent down to the

8:59 ↗ count counties and the cities based on

9:00 ↗ those population projec so isqua's

9:04 ↗ targets for housing and employment in

9:07 ↗ the next 20 years are 3,500 new housing

9:11 ↗ units and

9:13 ↗ 7,950 new jobs so you can see in the

9:17 ↗ First Column is the Baseline we're using

9:19 ↗ 2018 as the Baseline so there is some

9:22 ↗ Gap in how many housing units have been

9:25 ↗ built since 2018 that are not being

9:27 ↗ considered we're us the Baseline and

9:30 ↗ this is net new from then and then in

9:33 ↗ the last column you can see the capacity

9:35 ↗ that isqua has so there's plenty of

9:38 ↗ capacity to meet the target

9:44 ↗ currently so for the growth Alternatives

9:46 ↗ that I was talking about earlier and in

9:49 ↗ Eis it's required to identify a

9:52 ↗ reasonable range of alternatives for

9:55 ↗ that growth Target or for that growth

9:58 ↗ plan so sometimes that's two

10:00 ↗ Alternatives sometimes that's three

10:02 ↗ Alternatives in some cases that's four

10:05 ↗ Alternatives um and that's something

10:08 ↗ that we have not decided yet as a team

10:11 ↗ what the alternatives are going to be

10:12 ↗ specifically so I have a couple examples

10:14 ↗ just to give you an idea of what those

10:17 ↗ growth targets or growth Alternatives

10:19 ↗ might look like but that's not something

10:21 ↗ that we've actually decided on yet but

10:25 ↗ the Alternatives will represent

10:27 ↗ different growth strategies with varying

10:29 ↗ types and locations of that growth so it

10:32 ↗ really just determines where the growth

10:34 ↗ is going to be allocated so here you can

10:37 ↗ see an

10:39 ↗ example for example alternative a would

10:43 ↗ have 90 95% of growth in central isqua

10:46 ↗ with 5% of growth being outside Central

10:49 ↗ isqua that's just an example of how we

10:52 ↗ could narrow it down and then

10:54 ↗ alternative B could have 80% of growth

10:57 ↗ in Central isqua and 20% of growth

11:00 ↗ outside so when I talk about growth

11:03 ↗ Alternatives that's kind of what we're

11:05 ↗ talking about we're mostly deciding what

11:07 ↗ percentage of growth those 3,500 housing

11:11 ↗ units and those 9,000

11:13 ↗ 7,950 jobs where those are going to be

11:17 ↗ allocated

11:19 ↗ um and again we haven't exactly

11:22 ↗ pinpointed what those numbers are going

11:24 ↗ to be and what those alternatives are

11:26 ↗ going to

11:27 ↗ be and that's kind of what we want your

11:29 ↗ input on tonight as well if you think we

11:32 ↗ should consider one that's higher than

11:33 ↗ those growth targets or if we should

11:37 ↗ just stick with the growth targets and

11:38 ↗ have different

11:43 ↗ perspec just clarification yeah on the

11:47 ↗ jobs

11:48 ↗ number remote workers do those go into

11:51 ↗ those so someone is now going to be who

11:55 ↗ normally would have gone into Seattle or

11:58 ↗ but now they are able to do remote work

12:00 ↗ does that go towards the isqua

12:03 ↗ employment jobs number that

12:07 ↗ is long range planning manager s so um

12:11 ↗ that's actually a really great question

12:12 ↗ there we don't have a clear answer from

12:14 ↗ the region on how remote jobs are being

12:16 ↗ counted whether um it counts towards

12:19 ↗ where the employee lives or where the

12:22 ↗ employer is physically located and so

12:24 ↗ that's something that we're hoping to

12:26 ↗ get clarification uh on throughout this

12:28 ↗ process

12:32 ↗ commissioner

12:33 ↗ s would it make a difference and or I

12:38 ↗ guess the intent of the 7500 new jobs is

12:41 ↗ it to be physically here like the actual

12:45 ↗ business I guess that could go to that

12:48 ↗ question and on uh to see exactly where

12:52 ↗ if it if it factors in people sitting

12:55 ↗ here but working in Seattle basically

12:58 ↗ yes the so the intent with having the

13:00 ↗ targets for within city is was to kind

13:02 ↗ of try to tackle some of that inflow

13:04 ↗ outflow of trying to have people work

13:06 ↗ and live in the city so that we're

13:08 ↗ minimizing the impact of that growth

13:10 ↗ particularly on traffic yeah um in terms

13:12 ↗ of like what we're trying to achieve as

13:14 ↗ a city okay so that goes to

13:16 ↗ commissioner's Point basically

13:20 ↗ okay commissioner Milligan since we're

13:22 ↗ doing clarifying questions okay uh

13:25 ↗ number one I don't think that this was

13:27 ↗ in our packet

13:29 ↗ this chart and and the Alternatives is

13:32 ↗ that

13:33 ↗ correct so the the example example

13:37 ↗ growth Alternatives we were told that we

13:39 ↗ were asked in the packet that we were

13:40 ↗ going to consider growth Alternatives

13:42 ↗ but I don't remember being presented

13:43 ↗ with the the Alternatives this is just a

13:46 ↗ hypothetical example that we're just

13:48 ↗ going to be discussing just to give you

13:49 ↗ an idea of what it'll be evaluated for

13:51 ↗ the E good point because I was

13:53 ↗ completely lost what are the growth

13:55 ↗ Alternatives when I was reading the

13:57 ↗ packet you're asking a question I didn't

13:58 ↗ didn't know what they would be or what

14:00 ↗ they could be uh and then the other

14:01 ↗ clarifying question um Sarah did you say

14:03 ↗ earlier when you were talking about the

14:05 ↗ um base year of

14:06 ↗ 2018 um did you mean to say that uh new

14:11 ↗ units after 2018 could be part of the

14:14 ↗ 3500 correct that are slated for 2044

14:18 ↗ yes exactly thank

14:22 ↗ you all right any other clarifying

14:24 ↗ questions before we move

14:26 ↗ on please

14:31 ↗ okay so that was basically the end of

14:32 ↗ the

14:33 ↗ presentation so that was a good time to

14:35 ↗ ask

14:36 ↗ questions um I just wanted to give you

14:39 ↗ an idea before we do get into the main

14:41 ↗ discussion section um of the project

14:44 ↗ timeline so the draft e and the draft

14:46 ↗ comprehensive plan will be ready for

14:48 ↗ review in Spring next year so spring

14:51 ↗ 2024 and then the final versions will be

14:54 ↗ ready for review in the summer next year

14:57 ↗ with the final compr comprehensive plan

14:59 ↗ being adopted by city council hopefully

15:03 ↗ in the fall of

15:05 ↗ 202 so now we're back to our discussion

15:08 ↗ questions that we posed the very

15:10 ↗ beginning um I have them broken down on

15:12 ↗ different slides just so we can for

15:15 ↗ example this one look at what the topics

15:17 ↗ listed are um but this is meant to be a

15:23 ↗ open

15:24 ↗ conversation um free

15:26 ↗ flowing and we want to think about

15:29 ↗ if there's any topics not listed that

15:32 ↗ should be addressed in this

15:33 ↗ environmental impact statement

15:38 ↗ analysis all right well thank you Miss

15:40 ↗ de de Kroger um Commissioners please now

15:45 ↗ is the time to ask questions and

15:55 ↗ discussion commissioner

15:57 ↗ Sima think it's assumed that like

16:00 ↗ underserved communities within isqua

16:02 ↗ would fall underneath I guess public

16:05 ↗ services or where would that fall under

16:07 ↗ um within um the

16:11 ↗ analysis looking at this chart

16:17 ↗ here so the for unders communities it'll

16:21 ↗ kind of depend on the level of services

16:23 ↗ that are established for each of the

16:24 ↗ topic areas so it could be more than

16:26 ↗ just the Public Services it could also

16:28 ↗ Transportation it could be Parks and

16:30 ↗ Recreation and and the accessibility of

16:33 ↗ those type of services as well okay okay

16:36 ↗ very well thanks and I think that was

16:38 ↗ that goes to the second question just

16:41 ↗ making sure that's that's prioritized as

16:43 ↗ well that's where a lot some of the

16:45 ↗ impacts go to

16:54 ↗ thanks uh chair voice real quick

16:56 ↗ question for staff with those those

16:59 ↗ listings right there Stephen is planning

17:02 ↗ policy going to be addressing all of

17:04 ↗ them or are we going to stay in our

17:05 ↗ general area of focus like land use

17:07 ↗ housing utilities Capital facilities or

17:11 ↗ is the idea for all of us to go through

17:13 ↗ all of it I mean I know we obviously we

17:15 ↗ have a park board so just kind of get an

17:17 ↗ idea of what we're going to be looking

17:19 ↗ at

17:19 ↗ 2024 so the the the responsibility of

17:23 ↗ the planning policy commission is to

17:24 ↗ review all the elements in the the

17:27 ↗ comprehensive plan but at the same time

17:29 ↗ to your point of we have a lot of boards

17:31 ↗ of commissions that are working deeply

17:33 ↗ on updating a lot of these elements and

17:36 ↗ so the hope is to start with the

17:38 ↗ recommendations from those boards and

17:40 ↗ have that discussion with the planning

17:41 ↗ policy as we're working through

17:44 ↗ the great thank you commissioner

17:47 ↗ Milligan thank you uh and sorry for not

17:50 ↗ doing my homework well enough are all

17:52 ↗ are these all the chapters in the comp

17:55 ↗ plan no so it's hard for me to see

17:57 ↗ what's not there so what are we not

17:59 ↗ including in the Eis that we might think

18:03 ↗ should be the other elements are arts

18:05 ↗ and

18:06 ↗ culture and there's one other one that's

18:10 ↗ missing Human Services is the other

18:11 ↗ element that's missing from this list

18:14 ↗ and those were excluded from this list

18:16 ↗ primarily because they're not required

18:17 ↗ elements the city has chosen to add

18:19 ↗ those as elements and they're analyzed a

18:21 ↗ little bit differently because it's more

18:23 ↗ of access and the services we provide

18:26 ↗ not necessarily from the growth

18:31 ↗ sure please and then another question is

18:33 ↗ I wanted you to remind me because I'm

18:34 ↗ not finding it fast enough um when we

18:36 ↗ say environmental impact um that's it's

18:39 ↗ bigger than trees and birds yes right um

18:43 ↗ can you remind us what is um um in

18:46 ↗ considered in the yes um absolutely um

18:51 ↗ things like amount of imperious

18:53 ↗ surfaces uh water quality storm water

18:57 ↗ runoff um

18:59 ↗ climate change and climate

19:01 ↗ resilience it's like environmental

19:03 ↗ impact is looked at as a broad concept

19:07 ↗ so all of those things that could

19:08 ↗ possibly be impacted are considered not

19:11 ↗ just Wildlife

19:15 ↗ vegetation is it also the human

19:17 ↗ environment you know what I'm getting

19:19 ↗ thinking about is um seems like I'd

19:21 ↗ heard somewhere about um culture for

19:25 ↗ instance human culture and and Society

19:28 ↗ um are those things included in an

19:30 ↗ environmental impact

19:34 ↗ study I go ahead uh not typically uh

19:38 ↗ it's primarily um a lot of the anal

19:41 ↗ analysis is done based on the data that

19:43 ↗ were that's available and so if we're

19:45 ↗ looking at human culture there needs to

19:47 ↗ be some type of data set or some type of

19:50 ↗ information that we're analyzing in

19:51 ↗ order to compare it with the growth or

19:53 ↗ the growth alternative that's being

19:55 ↗ assumed for uh certain areas of the city

20:00 ↗ City Commissioner grass I think this

20:03 ↗ covers um a large swath of things I mean

20:08 ↗ there's going to be a if you think about

20:10 ↗ 2044 that's right around light a Link

20:13 ↗ light rail and kind of a big that's kind

20:15 ↗ of like the big change that's happening

20:17 ↗ and the question I have is the other

20:20 ↗ areas that have gone through I'll use

20:23 ↗ bellw as an example is there any

20:25 ↗ learnings from when they had to kind of

20:27 ↗ plan around

20:29 ↗ their new big um Transit

20:32 ↗ areas that would shed light of oh wait

20:35 ↗ we should make sure we have a double

20:36 ↗ click on certain parts of the E because

20:38 ↗ they had something very similar that

20:40 ↗ we're going to have at the end of this

20:46 ↗ period uh that's why I was that's one of

20:48 ↗ the reasons why I was asking you remind

20:50 ↗ me that um the historic

20:53 ↗ home um it's a human environment was

20:57 ↗ probably part of the

20:59 ↗ e

21:04 ↗ Winters

21:12 ↗ down okay I was waiting to see if there

21:15 ↗ was anything else before I respond um

21:17 ↗ yes there is a lot of learning from a

21:19 ↗ lot of our neighboring cities in terms

21:20 ↗ of uh the process they went through

21:22 ↗ working with sound transit to planahead

21:25 ↗ a lot of the work that's going into the

21:27 ↗ the transit study is also looking at

21:29 ↗ what what are those next steps that we

21:30 ↗ need to determine and working with um

21:33 ↗ our coordinating with those neighboring

21:35 ↗ cities and getting from their experience

21:38 ↗ exactly what would work best for City

21:39 ↗ isqua to prepare for a lot of that

21:42 ↗ process because sound transit's not

21:44 ↗ going to be ready for discussions for

21:45 ↗ light Ro planning until 2027 at the

21:48 ↗ earliest so right now we're just trying

21:50 ↗ to get ahead of the

21:52 ↗ game commissioner because once again if

21:55 ↗ I base it on what's the big bogey that's

21:57 ↗ going to change it's this big Transit

21:59 ↗ Center and things like noise so for

22:03 ↗ example where would that fall within

22:06 ↗ these items and you can say any type of

22:09 ↗ pollution noise light but noise is

22:11 ↗ probably the the most specific one that

22:14 ↗ people could rally around if there's a

22:15 ↗ lot more on

22:17 ↗ Transit um noise is definitely something

22:20 ↗ that will be considered um in terms of

22:22 ↗ pollution and in this case I would say

22:24 ↗ it's looked at how it relates to these

22:27 ↗ topics so if noise related to

22:29 ↗ Transportation or to towards the Light

22:31 ↗ Rail station specifically with the train

22:34 ↗ specifically with uh more traffic

22:37 ↗ congestion around that area it would go

22:39 ↗ under the transportation section but

22:41 ↗ it's definitely considered in the

22:44 ↗ e one thing to think about for the topic

22:46 ↗ of Light Rail is sound transit's also

22:49 ↗ going to be cond conducting their own

22:50 ↗ sea process too and so if there are

22:53 ↗ impacts from noise or pollution or

22:55 ↗ anything for the surrounding areas

22:57 ↗ they'll Pro be providing mitigation for

22:58 ↗ that part of the project I assume it

23:01 ↗ would be here the question is does it

23:02 ↗ deserve to be at the same level as some

23:05 ↗ of these other pieces or as you want to

23:08 ↗ make sure something like that doesn't

23:09 ↗ get lost how it's buried under

23:10 ↗ transportation right to commissioner

23:12 ↗ cr's Point not only noise pollution

23:15 ↗ light

23:16 ↗ pollution pollution in

23:20 ↗ general but I understand what uh Mr

23:23 ↗ Kroger saying which is that it gets put

23:26 ↗ in the subheadings but

23:37 ↗ chair Bader I can jump in um think of

23:41 ↗ how to like articulate my question kind

23:44 ↗ of goes back to commissioner sm's first

23:47 ↗ point about kind of impacted populations

23:50 ↗ um

23:52 ↗ and when I think of like are there

23:54 ↗ topics that not listed that should be

23:55 ↗ addressed there's a whole bunch of

23:56 ↗ things I think that are not listed that

23:58 ↗ I think should be addressed and like one

24:00 ↗ is like where are those impacts most

24:03 ↗ felt and is this analysis kind of

24:05 ↗ looking at the city as a whole um and

24:08 ↗ like what it like average environmental

24:10 ↗ impacts or is there like a level of

24:12 ↗ detail that um assesses like if there

24:15 ↗ are places or populations that are

24:18 ↗ disproportionately impacted um and

24:25 ↗ strategies

24:26 ↗ question

24:31 ↗ that

24:32 ↗ happening we'll take a look at that to

24:34 ↗ see how how that can be incorporated as

24:37 ↗ part of

24:38 ↗ this I guess the bucket would be like

24:41 ↗ being like environmental justice is

24:43 ↗ assess as part of

24:48 ↗ us commissioner s yeah and that that's

24:51 ↗ kind of forward thinking because

24:52 ↗ environmental justice is almost it's

24:55 ↗ been around for a long time but it's a

24:57 ↗ new ter term and a lot of um

24:59 ↗ municipalities are actually looking into

25:01 ↗ that right now so just how that would be

25:05 ↗ thread within this Eis as well and

25:08 ↗ making sure that it's not hidden

25:10 ↗ underneath these sections but it's

25:12 ↗ actually brought to the Forefront as

25:22 ↗ well great points

25:25 ↗ questions anyone else like to

25:29 ↗ go commissioner

25:31 ↗ Patterson uh commissioner Patterson can

25:33 ↗ you please clarify uh the context of

25:36 ↗ displacement analysis in in the Eis

25:40 ↗ context is that like people displacement

25:42 ↗ or resource displacement what is the

25:45 ↗ it's primarily housing and jobs so

25:47 ↗ looking at uh displacement of housing as

25:50 ↗ new development comes in but also

25:51 ↗ displacement of potential employer or

25:53 ↗ retail commercial anything that might

25:55 ↗ get displaced due to new development uh

25:58 ↗ from the growth alternative that we're

25:59 ↗ looking at okay thank you so if I may be

26:03 ↗ so bold um we talked I think it was one

26:06 ↗ of our last meetings we were talking

26:08 ↗ about Town Square that where Hobby Lobby

26:10 ↗ is it was sold I was actually down there

26:13 ↗ this evening and they were talking about

26:15 ↗ how they still have four years left on

26:16 ↗ their lease so that would be kind of

26:18 ↗ looking at things like that because

26:20 ↗ those jobs would be

26:21 ↗ displaced obviously these are just

26:23 ↗ rumors but you know they're talking

26:25 ↗ about apartments and they'll have retail

26:27 ↗ below but that would be an example of it

26:30 ↗ because all those shops would most

26:31 ↗ likely have to be folded in new

26:33 ↗ infrastructure New

26:35 ↗ Foundations uh in order to make those

26:37 ↗ livable

26:38 ↗ commercial yeah yes but it's also

26:40 ↗ looking at even the smaller retail shops

26:43 ↗ so um I actually can't think of a great

26:47 ↗ example but if you look at like a

26:48 ↗ smaller business not just a big box

26:50 ↗ store that's some of the uh smaller

26:53 ↗ retail businesses that uh communities

26:55 ↗ like isqua enjoy having and so how is

26:57 ↗ that something that we can retain within

26:59 ↗ the city as new development comes in is

27:01 ↗ is part of that displac and Analysis of

27:03 ↗ where are their potential impacts and

27:05 ↗ then what are some potential policies or

27:07 ↗ mitigation um to either minimize that or

27:10 ↗ prevent

27:12 ↗ it Bader yeah just a clarifying question

27:15 ↗ on that because back to commissioner

27:17 ↗ Milligan's point that feels a little

27:18 ↗ more like human environment impact as

27:21 ↗ opposed to like natural environment

27:22 ↗ impact um looking at kind of like

27:26 ↗ businesses right in the types of I guess

27:28 ↗ I just

27:31 ↗ don't great if it is I don't

27:34 ↗ following there's also the environmental

27:36 ↗ so the uh to what Sarah talked about for

27:39 ↗ the storm water impacts or the impacts

27:41 ↗ of if we assume more growth in one part

27:44 ↗ of the city more so than the other then

27:47 ↗ what are the impacts of uh Parks needs

27:50 ↗ in parks and infrastructure uh what are

27:52 ↗ some preserved areas that are nearby

27:54 ↗ that are going to require some

27:55 ↗ mitigation or have some NE negative

27:57 ↗ impacts on those areas so there are

27:59 ↗ there is the natural environment

28:01 ↗ analysis as well but it's it's just like

28:04 ↗ the list it's a pretty broad spectrum of

28:06 ↗ what we're going to be analyzing with

28:07 ↗ these different growth Alternatives but

28:09 ↗ the the idea is to kind of try to use

28:12 ↗ the crystal ball to look in the future

28:14 ↗ of where are these negative impacts if

28:16 ↗ we're assuming different growth in

28:18 ↗ different areas of the

28:24 ↗ City Commissioner s so once the Eis is

28:29 ↗ done what what's

28:32 ↗ next so the Eis is really to inform the

28:36 ↗ comprehensive Plan update and so it is

28:40 ↗ used to inform how the comprehensive

28:44 ↗ plan finally is finalized and and

28:47 ↗ implemented in the future as well but it

28:52 ↗ really the most important thing is

28:54 ↗ choosing that growth alternative and how

28:56 ↗ that will then imp impact the future and

28:59 ↗ how growth is

29:01 ↗ allocated so the mitigations and

29:04 ↗ recommendations from it will be adopted

29:09 ↗ and utilized and essentially moving

29:12 ↗ forward with what that plan growth

29:14 ↗ basically so it it won't be something

29:16 ↗ where it can essentially stop the actual

29:20 ↗ growth it's something to help push it

29:23 ↗ along per

29:25 ↗ say yeah also helps us set up up any new

29:28 ↗ policies that we potentially aren't

29:29 ↗ proposing yet to address some of the

29:32 ↗ issues that we just didn't see until

29:35 ↗ after the analysis was done okay thank

29:39 ↗ you

29:41 ↗ apologies before but so we go through

29:44 ↗ this process come up with a list of

29:48 ↗ impacts that then Council that that then

29:53 ↗ like Signs off on that or is there like

29:54 ↗ a higher power that like comes in and

29:58 ↗ says this is appropriate right or is it

30:00 ↗ up to isqua to kind of determine what is

30:02 ↗ appropriate and then how do we hold

30:03 ↗ ourselves accountable if it is City

30:06 ↗ obviously knowing that Council serves

30:08 ↗ that role to

30:09 ↗ some it's it's ultimately up to the

30:15 ↗ city commission Milligan okay so now I'm

30:19 ↗ confused I thought we were talking about

30:23 ↗ how um elements in the comprehensive

30:25 ↗ plan including all all of these listed

30:28 ↗ here uh will be analyzed through the

30:31 ↗ lens of an Eis and then I've heard in

30:33 ↗ the last few minutes it's all about

30:36 ↗ growth how does growth

30:39 ↗ impact and there are plenty of things in

30:42 ↗ here that aren't growth they choices of

30:44 ↗ this that or the other thing

30:47 ↗ and I'm are we just talking about the

30:49 ↗ impacts of growth or are we talking

30:51 ↗ about the impacts of certain policies in

30:53 ↗ the comprehensive plan and how they

30:58 ↗ impact it's the impacts of growth just

31:01 ↗ growth yes not all these things well

31:04 ↗ it's looking at all these things and how

31:07 ↗ with that growth yeah with that

31:10 ↗ growth so it's it's kind of like a trail

31:14 ↗ so impact of growth on these things and

31:17 ↗ therefore these things impact on the

31:22 ↗ environment with that hypothetical

31:25 ↗ growth being considered

31:27 ↗ so we're not analyzing these things as

31:30 ↗ they are currently in existing

31:33 ↗ conditions we're analyzing how they

31:35 ↗ would be with that growth being

31:39 ↗ allocated 95% in central Esa and 5%

31:44 ↗ outside I think to Steven's Point

31:46 ↗ crystal

31:47 ↗ ball yeah and plus it's a it's a rolling

31:50 ↗ document I mean how often would the Eis

31:52 ↗ be updated with the comp plan every 10

31:55 ↗ years uh yes it depends on how what

31:58 ↗ actually changes 10 years from now if if

32:01 ↗ we're in a place where everything

32:04 ↗ aligned and it went according to plan

32:06 ↗ and and it we don't think we need

32:09 ↗ another E 10 from 10 years from now then

32:11 ↗ we won't do another full one we would do

32:12 ↗ a supplemental to see if we continue on

32:15 ↗ the same

32:19 ↗ trend for my own clarification I think

32:22 ↗ that makes sense right Trum plan is

32:25 ↗ designed plan right growth how we're

32:28 ↗ gonna guide

32:30 ↗ growth

32:32 ↗ growed making sure

32:37 ↗ I'm thank you thank

32:40 ↗ you Vice chair Vader um that that isn't

32:44 ↗ the way that I thought about if if we

32:46 ↗ never

32:47 ↗ grew we would still need a comp plan to

32:50 ↗ make decisions to set values to create

32:53 ↗ standards of how things change growth

32:56 ↗ isn't the only change that a city um

32:59 ↗ experiences and so I I think of a a comp

33:02 ↗ plan as as a guiding um

33:05 ↗ document that growth is an element of it

33:09 ↗ or or maybe it's not you know what if it

33:12 ↗ weren't of course not around here it

33:14 ↗ wouldn't be but um would not be but all

33:17 ↗ of these things would still need um

33:19 ↗ standards values strategies all those

33:23 ↗ things you know like for for instance

33:24 ↗ our Parks

33:25 ↗ plan

33:28 ↗ doesn't just have its objectives because

33:32 ↗ the population is getting bigger in the

33:33 ↗ city of isqua one of the objectives of

33:36 ↗ the parks plan is to preserve our

33:38 ↗ riparian areas um reduce flooding you

33:41 ↗ know restore the flow of the isqua creek

33:44 ↗ that's not because we have more people

33:46 ↗ here it's because isqua Creek needed for

33:48 ↗ instance um some loving care and so we

33:51 ↗ put it into um our guiding document so I

33:54 ↗ don't think it has to be just about

33:56 ↗ growth that's where I'm confused because

33:58 ↗ I I I look at the uh packet now and I

34:01 ↗ say how it guides

34:03 ↗ growth and I can I respond to that real

34:06 ↗ quick so that's a great point and one of

34:10 ↗ the things that we didn't present

34:12 ↗ because we haven't actually decided what

34:14 ↗ those alternatives are going to be is

34:16 ↗ that there's almost always in an Eis a

34:20 ↗ no action alternative so we will be

34:23 ↗ analyzing if everything just continued

34:26 ↗ as it was and we did not have that

34:29 ↗ growth there that will be alternative a

34:32 ↗ that will be included for sure in our

34:35 ↗ analysis it's called the no action and

34:37 ↗ then the Alternatives that we're

34:39 ↗ deciding on still are those action

34:42 ↗ Alternatives that would have different

34:44 ↗ percentages just to clarify really quick

34:47 ↗ we're looking at multiple different

34:49 ↗ Alternatives and then what the feedback

34:51 ↗ we're getting from you all and then from

34:52 ↗ the open house and then um as collective

34:55 ↗ staff we're going through multiple

34:56 ↗ different Alternatives we'll start to

34:57 ↗ narrow it down and that's what we'll be

34:59 ↗ presenting to the council Committee in

35:03 ↗ January commissioner gr so I think

35:06 ↗ there's some kind of key hypotheses when

35:09 ↗ you kind of start a project like this

35:11 ↗ there's going to be a bunch of big

35:12 ↗ things that change over a 20-year period

35:15 ↗ 25% more people that's probably a likely

35:18 ↗ thing whether it's 20 whether it's 30

35:19 ↗ there's going to be a lot more people

35:21 ↗ here because the whole area is growing

35:23 ↗ um the nature of work is another big

35:27 ↗ theme that may change hence you may be

35:30 ↗ able to get your job's number because

35:31 ↗ the nature of work so there should be

35:33 ↗ some thought and hypothesis on that

35:35 ↗ there could be another one of the with

35:37 ↗ that growth the demographics change

35:39 ↗ schools aren't on here I'm not sure if

35:41 ↗ that's part of here because you have you

35:44 ↗ know where I grew up you know they built

35:46 ↗ a bunch of schools and they closed the

35:48 ↗ schools 15 years later then they had to

35:50 ↗ reopen them 15 years later so there's

35:52 ↗ some es and flows and there's changes

35:54 ↗ when you have big population so so with

35:57 ↗ assume when we look at growth it's

36:00 ↗ almost like there's going to be some big

36:01 ↗ changes in 20 years and then we

36:04 ↗ mentioned earlier having a Transit Hub

36:07 ↗ as part of this whole thing and what's

36:08 ↗ the nature and the hypotheses around how

36:11 ↗ transportation is going to work which

36:12 ↗ would then have impact on on some of

36:14 ↗ those things I wasn't sure if there's

36:16 ↗ some of those overarching kind of key

36:18 ↗ hypothesis and

36:20 ↗ assumptions that it's not just oh a

36:22 ↗ bunch more houses but there's a bunch of

36:24 ↗ other things that are tied to that

36:25 ↗ because that there's going to be more

36:27 ↗ people I mean unless you plan for a

36:31 ↗ meteorite hitting it's going to be

36:32 ↗ something but there's going to be more

36:34 ↗ people um so I'm just curious is there

36:38 ↗ other key themes when we talk about

36:40 ↗ growth not just housing units and jobs

36:43 ↗ like I just

36:47 ↗ mentioned yes there

36:50 ↗ is and then to respond to your comment

36:52 ↗ and give commissioner Kennedy some

36:54 ↗ credit of asking the question as well

36:56 ↗ well on uh prior to tonight's meeting

36:59 ↗ schools are considered it's it's

37:01 ↗ considered a public service and so it is

37:03 ↗ analyzed as part of the Es as well but

37:06 ↗ because schools are required to do their

37:09 ↗ own type of analysis and determine how

37:13 ↗ they grow out with um all the

37:16 ↗ communities that they serve uh the city

37:19 ↗ doesn't have as much control for a lot

37:21 ↗ of that but we do look at the impacts as

37:22 ↗ part of the e at a kind of a higher

37:24 ↗ level it does touch things like land use

37:26 ↗ and transort

37:27 ↗ because schools have to be somewhere

37:30 ↗ yesion s and I think we have to look

37:34 ↗ back at this is a legal requirement and

37:38 ↗ when there's going to be any potential

37:41 ↗ impact on on a community due to a

37:44 ↗ development or proposed development by

37:48 ↗ law there has to be that study whatever

37:51 ↗ if it's a I think they call it a

37:53 ↗ Fonzi you you go the route I think of an

37:56 ↗ Environ enironmental assessment but if

37:57 ↗ they find a

37:59 ↗ significant impact you go the Eis route

38:02 ↗ basically so I think we're mandated by

38:05 ↗ law to do this now as it pertains to the

38:08 ↗ comprehensive plan you have the aspect

38:11 ↗ where you if if you're just normally

38:14 ↗ updating the comprehensive plan as and

38:18 ↗ there's going to be no growth then most

38:20 ↗ likely an Eis or this um an Eis wouldn't

38:25 ↗ be needed but it's because they found

38:28 ↗ that there's a there may be a

38:30 ↗ significant impact in what has been

38:33 ↗ planned in the comprehensive plan

38:36 ↗ basically that's why the Eis is is

38:38 ↗ moving forward that's

38:41 ↗ correct thank

38:43 ↗ you and to respond to commissioner

38:45 ↗ Milligan's comments about you know the E

38:48 ↗ could be looking at a lot more than just

38:50 ↗ growth so to um what Sarah was saying

38:55 ↗ about this being a required portion of

38:58 ↗ the comp plan we have limited resources

39:02 ↗ in terms of how much we can actually

39:04 ↗ analyze but when you're looking at

39:06 ↗ beyond the comprehensive plan and a lot

39:08 ↗ of our functional plans and strategic

39:10 ↗ plans they kind of get to what you're

39:12 ↗ looking at in terms of just be just

39:15 ↗ looking beyond the growth what does the

39:17 ↗ city want for these specific topic areas

39:19 ↗ not just because of growth but because

39:21 ↗ that's the vision for those topic areas

39:23 ↗ for the city so that kind of gets to

39:25 ↗ what you were think imagining from the

39:28 ↗ Eis am I getting that

39:30 ↗ correctly um if you were imagining that

39:33 ↗ if we had a policy change say in land

39:37 ↗ use and sustainability or in climate

39:39 ↗ resilience or in one of these categories

39:41 ↗ if we had a policy change in the comp

39:43 ↗ plan what would be the environmental

39:47 ↗ impacts of that policy change that's

39:49 ↗ what I was

39:51 ↗ imagining not just growth on um

39:57 ↗ the the act of changing a policy or

39:59 ↗ updating a policy or adding a new

40:03 ↗ policy so the E for the comp plan does

40:07 ↗ kind of it does kind of take into

40:09 ↗ account a lot of the proposed policies

40:11 ↗ and goals that we are proposing with the

40:12 ↗ comp plan update um separately if you're

40:16 ↗ looking at different regulations that

40:17 ↗ we're wanting to update um or the

40:20 ↗ different topic areas there is a

40:22 ↗ separate analysis or sea analysis that's

40:25 ↗ done for those as well

40:27 ↗ um whether it's project or non-project

40:28 ↗ based so there this isn't the only

40:32 ↗ environmental impact analysis or

40:34 ↗ environmental analysis that we do this

40:36 ↗ is just primarily for the comprehensive

40:37 ↗ plan which the focus of or what's

40:40 ↗ required of the comprehensive plan is to

40:42 ↗ look at growth and so that's primarily

40:44 ↗ why this Eis is focused on the growth

40:53 ↗ impacts that's your bet um things

40:57 ↗ right following now um do and I I kind

41:03 ↗ of get the growth because it feels like

41:04 ↗ when we're talking about policy right

41:06 ↗ there's a lot of like could happen or it

41:08 ↗ could not happen or it could look like

41:10 ↗ this or it could look like that and so I

41:12 ↗ understand like growth as like helpful

41:13 ↗ bounds to kind of do the analysis and

41:15 ↗ appreciate the like no growth um

41:18 ↗ alternative so that's making sense to me

41:21 ↗ now do the I guess my question is do the

41:23 ↗ functional plans go through some sort of

41:27 ↗ environmental assessment because that

41:28 ↗ feels a lot more tangible right of like

41:30 ↗ if we're setting specific strategies or

41:32 ↗ specific targets like understanding the

41:34 ↗ impact of those specifically um as

41:37 ↗ opposed to the comp plan which feels a

41:39 ↗ little bit more like high

41:40 ↗ level they do go through an

41:42 ↗ environmental analysis um depending on

41:45 ↗ what it is it may go through a full e or

41:48 ↗ may go through something a little bit

41:51 ↗ smaller there's something called a sepa

41:54 ↗ checklist don't qualify for for the

41:57 ↗ significant impacts that require an Eis

42:01 ↗ sometimes there's less significant

42:02 ↗ impacts and then you do

42:05 ↗ it have some of

42:12 ↗ those any

42:15 ↗ follow-ups sah were you able to get all

42:17 ↗ the information that you wanted yes we

42:19 ↗ do have a couple more questions

42:23 ↗ oh yes on this one um the next question

42:27 ↗ is very similar to this question so we

42:29 ↗ might have already covered it it's more

42:33 ↗ generally are there any specific

42:35 ↗ concerns so I don't want to speak for

42:37 ↗ you but I do think some of those things

42:39 ↗ have come up already such as underserved

42:41 ↗ communities or environmental justice um

42:45 ↗ but just making sure um if anyone has

42:49 ↗ more comments on any specific concerns

42:51 ↗ that should be prioritized in the

42:55 ↗ eisl

43:00 ↗ okay great then we'll move on to the

43:03 ↗ last

43:04 ↗ question so the last question is going

43:07 ↗ back to those growth

43:09 ↗ Alternatives again we have not decided

43:12 ↗ and we still have a couple options that

43:14 ↗ we're going to narrow it down to but if

43:17 ↗ we are looking at a growth alternative

43:19 ↗ that would be higher than the growth

43:21 ↗ Target Z here what do you all think is

43:24 ↗ important to consider

43:26 ↗ commissioner craft so are there

43:29 ↗ assumptions that the boundary lines of

43:32 ↗ isqua are the same in 20 44 as they are

43:35 ↗ now or is acquisition of

43:38 ↗ other um parts of King County that don't

43:41 ↗ roll into a city part of the growth

43:43 ↗ that' be one thing I would think I was

43:45 ↗ an alternative I don't know what the

43:46 ↗ assumption is it's it's pretty safe to

43:48 ↗ say that the boundaries are going to

43:49 ↗ stay as they

43:50 ↗ are there's not really a lot more an

43:53 ↗ land

43:55 ↗ correct

44:04 ↗ any

44:07 ↗ other I don't know if it's related to

44:09 ↗ this question but thinking about the

44:10 ↗ jobs and the remote jobs Point

44:12 ↗ particular so I work remotely for a

44:15 ↗ company based in California I leave that

44:18 ↗ job that job doesn't get

44:20 ↗ replaced right um and so I just I feel

44:24 ↗ like we need to think about that because

44:26 ↗ remote jobs are not necessarily like

44:27 ↗ stable jobs in the

44:31 ↗ city yeah true

44:35 ↗ yeah it's very yeah very dependent on

44:37 ↗ Sarah so me as one of those 7,950 people

44:41 ↗ because I came since 2018 um I'm one of

44:44 ↗ them so we're actually down to

44:47 ↗ 7,949

44:48 ↗ um but my point being I think that like

44:52 ↗ thinking of the like to me they're

44:54 ↗ different than like uh and especially

44:56 ↗ like who works in those jobs right and

44:59 ↗ um kind

45:01 ↗ of

45:03 ↗ yeah Mr

45:06 ↗ Milligan uh I think you said that one of

45:08 ↗ the Alternatives would be to change the

45:11 ↗ growth numbers to larger

45:14 ↗ numbers we wouldn't be changing the

45:16 ↗ growth

45:17 ↗ targets

45:19 ↗ just in the Eis for one of the growth

45:23 ↗ Alternatives we might consider numbers

45:25 ↗ that are higher than the targets but the

45:27 ↗ targets wouldn't

45:30 ↗ change because the targets are

45:32 ↗ determined not determined by the city

45:34 ↗ yeah and uh and so it would just be an

45:38 ↗ exercise to see what the impacts were if

45:41 ↗ we grew by more correct and I'm trying

45:46 ↗ to think up the value of of that and

45:50 ↗ just off the cuff I think I can think of

45:51 ↗ one reason why that might be a good idea

45:53 ↗ to explore what happens if we grow more

45:56 ↗ and that is because these growth targets

45:58 ↗ are are hardly ever uh meaningful to us

46:02 ↗ we had growth Targets in the past the

46:04 ↗ past round of them and we exceeded them

46:06 ↗ by a great deal and perhaps if we had

46:10 ↗ evaluated the impacts and understood

46:14 ↗ what the um what the impacts were and

46:16 ↗ what mitigations might have been

46:18 ↗ required we might have handled that ex

46:20 ↗ uh excessive growth better I don't know

46:24 ↗ um

46:26 ↗ that's an interesting that's an

46:27 ↗ interesting concept because already I I

46:30 ↗ think Sarah kind of hinted that we may

46:32 ↗ have already reached our growth Target

46:33 ↗ here in 2023 and I have a list of um uh

46:38 ↗ projects in the city's pipeline

46:41 ↗ currently that will meet that if it

46:43 ↗ hasn't been met already so it probably

46:45 ↗ will be doubled um easily without even

46:48 ↗ trying so to not evaluate the impacts

46:52 ↗ could be a big Miss if we do evaluate

46:55 ↗ the impacts and see that there are um

46:57 ↗ some things that we need to

47:00 ↗ do um we'll be better prepared because

47:03 ↗ the growth Target doesn't stop

47:06 ↗ growth just our um land uses and the

47:13 ↗ economy it'd be interesting to see that

47:15 ↗ as an alternative um to look back at the

47:17 ↗ last round of Target and see how we

47:20 ↗ exceeded it by what percentage and then

47:21 ↗ put that whatever say it's 15% and then

47:25 ↗ put it alternative that shows okay this

47:27 ↗ is what happens if we were to repeat

47:28 ↗ what happened the

47:30 ↗ last this is alternative

47:34 ↗ three quick question so Baseline I'll

47:38 ↗ chuse housing for a second so

47:39 ↗ 166 do we have line of sight if you just

47:43 ↗ did a snapshot today what the number

47:47 ↗ is I'm just curious of

47:50 ↗ yeah I'm just saying so we'd have to get

47:53 ↗ back to you within exact yeah I'm just

47:55 ↗ saying if at like 168 or are we already

47:57 ↗ at 20 which

47:59 ↗ means you definitely have to have an

48:01 ↗ alternative that's much higher than

48:03 ↗ adding 3500 to 166 because we're already

48:07 ↗ it's that's a big unknown and I do agree

48:12 ↗ having um an understanding of a higher

48:14 ↗ number especially on housing units and

48:18 ↗ not everything on that long list there's

48:19 ↗ there be a few that you're going to want

48:21 ↗ to like land use housing transportation

48:25 ↗ there's a few of them that have a much

48:28 ↗ bigger variability based on that higher

48:30 ↗ number maybe not everything maybe you

48:32 ↗ don't have to do that double click on

48:33 ↗ everything and to commissioner C's point

48:35 ↗ that might be a lot more helpful a

48:36 ↗ snapshot of where we are now than

48:38 ↗ actually looking back at the last throw

48:39 ↗ Target that probably probably be a

48:41 ↗ better idea commissioner

48:45 ↗ Kennedy so I have a question about how

48:47 ↗ we measure um job growth given the

48:50 ↗ conversations around remote work which

48:54 ↗ so many people do these

48:56 ↗ days I've never seen a survey so how

48:59 ↗ does the city know that someone sits

49:01 ↗ their home working for a company in

49:04 ↗ California versus I mean we can measure

49:06 ↗ growth if Costco hires you know 2,000

49:09 ↗ new employees sitting in their lovely

49:12 ↗ buildings in isqua we know that bu and

49:14 ↗ seats here in the city but if more and

49:16 ↗ more people are working from

49:18 ↗ home or companies in other locations how

49:22 ↗ do we know that so uh a lot of the major

49:25 ↗ employeers report out to you know how

49:27 ↗ many employees they have and the type of

49:29 ↗ work environment that they have so we

49:31 ↗ have we actually have to make a lot of

49:32 ↗ assumptions based on the type of

49:34 ↗ industries that we have what the

49:36 ↗ employeers are telling us and then

49:37 ↗ what's happening in the other cities

49:38 ↗ around us as well I would I would assume

49:41 ↗ they still pay

49:44 ↗ ta well I mean just even that example

49:47 ↗ how would anyone know if we're measuring

49:49 ↗ jobs in isqu how' anyone know that she

49:52 ↗ works from home for a company in

49:54 ↗ California so I'm I'm a unique case

49:57 ↗ where I am the only Washington state

49:59 ↗ employee in My Little Company of 20

50:01 ↗ people and so my home is actually the

50:04 ↗ registered office um in the state of

50:07 ↗ Washington of my company and so I don't

50:09 ↗ know if isqua somehow unlike the

50:13 ↗ state whatever the form is I handle that

50:16 ↗ stuff but like is able to see right that

50:20 ↗ like this company has like my house as I

50:26 ↗ wonder I'd have to look see how maybe I

50:30 ↗ shouldn't like but I do know you know

50:33 ↗ when we're looking at a lot of the

50:35 ↗ targets or the assumptions of what to

50:38 ↗ expect for the city we are looking at

50:41 ↗ Industries what how they're how they are

50:45 ↗ um situated in other cities uh what they

50:49 ↗ they can tell us everything they want

50:50 ↗ but they don't always tell us every

50:53 ↗ detail of where every employee is going

50:55 ↗ to be

50:56 ↗ so we just have to make several

50:57 ↗ assumptions based on the information

50:59 ↗ that we're

51:01 ↗ given commissioner s and the the

51:05 ↗ Employers in isqua are the ones that are

51:07 ↗ feeding you the information on how many

51:11 ↗ how many employees are coming to their

51:13 ↗ offices right correct okay and then

51:15 ↗ there's also the senses that we take

51:17 ↗ information from as well but yes it's

51:19 ↗ just the collection of all that

51:20 ↗ information that we um put together our

51:23 ↗ assessment on employers as well as even

51:26 ↗ the population

51:28 ↗ okay commissioner crafts so when I think

51:32 ↗ about impacts of growth we're looking at

51:35 ↗ from understanding what happens in Isa

51:37 ↗ but if I take a step back a lot of the

51:40 ↗ growth in the next 20 years are going to

51:42 ↗ be I'll pick on a couple markets like uh

51:45 ↗ Maple Valley and black diamond and

51:48 ↗ there's going to be because of their

51:49 ↗ growth a lot of in Impact in isqua

51:53 ↗ around

51:54 ↗ transportation

51:56 ↗ how are Regional changes of the growth

52:01 ↗ do we handle a part of our Eis

52:03 ↗ especially around something that's pass

52:06 ↗ I'll use Transportation as the pass

52:07 ↗ through traffic or is that just out of

52:09 ↗ scope for as we think about this so as

52:13 ↗ part of the E we do kind of a a traffic

52:16 ↗ analysis model and it looks at Regional

52:19 ↗ impacts on us as well as

52:23 ↗ local all right

52:25 ↗ commissioner Millian we'll take oh no

52:29 ↗ I'm going to start wrapping this up

52:31 ↗ um yeah commissioner mil um it would be

52:34 ↗ interesting to know I was just trying to

52:35 ↗ look it up there was a statistic

52:37 ↗ published uh recently about the growth

52:39 ↗ that Costco alone projects uh in the

52:42 ↗ near term uh so that they're talking

52:44 ↗ about business growth I don't know how

52:46 ↗ much that translates into employment

52:48 ↗ growth but their campus was going to

52:50 ↗ Triple in size I think with the

52:53 ↗ development

52:54 ↗ agreement think so uh that would be

52:57 ↗ interesting to add to the um discussion

52:59 ↗ and then I wanted to answer uh

53:02 ↗ commissioner cr's question about housing

53:03 ↗ units based on the oh I had it how did I

53:10 ↗ lose it um it's in the report card and

53:14 ↗ it's

53:15 ↗ 177,000 something something in the

53:19 ↗ 2022 uh housing

53:24 ↗ report thank

53:26 ↗ you thank you commissioner Milligan um

53:30 ↗ if we do have any more comments or Mr

53:33 ↗ Kroger where should we send them should

53:35 ↗ we send them to you or to Stephen to

53:38 ↗ Stephen okay so the conversation does

53:40 ↗ not have to

53:41 ↗ end just going to go uh electronically

53:45 ↗ but I do want to thank you for your time

53:47 ↗ for your fantastic

53:49 ↗ presentation go ahead uh were we going

53:52 ↗ to talk there was an alternative

53:53 ↗ presented earlier about where the growth

53:54 ↗ would go is that are we done talking

53:57 ↗ about that or is that the example yeah

54:00 ↗ the example in the presentation was

54:02 ↗ primarily just to explain the type of

54:04 ↗ Alternatives that we would look at as

54:05 ↗ part of the E we're not going to talk

54:07 ↗ about that one it wasn't necessarily to

54:08 ↗ say this is one of them that we're

54:10 ↗ considering it was primarily just to

54:12 ↗ help explain what the E does are we

54:15 ↗ going to hear any other ideas besides

54:17 ↗ growing by a larger housing and jobs

54:20 ↗ numbers are what are the other

54:23 ↗ ideas how can we talk

54:26 ↗ about well the the purpose of tonight

54:29 ↗ wasn't necessarily to dive into the

54:30 ↗ different Alternatives it was primarily

54:32 ↗ to if if we go grow hot more or less

54:35 ↗ what are the important topics that we

54:37 ↗ need to consider with the e that's the

54:39 ↗ only one you want to talk about correct

54:40 ↗ you don't care about where it is or any

54:42 ↗ of the other Alternatives in this

54:44 ↗ context well I think we've just

54:46 ↗ discussed a lot of where it needs to go

54:48 ↗ at least when we were discussing the

54:49 ↗ land use element you know a lot of the

54:51 ↗ discussion was the vast majority of it

54:53 ↗ needs to go in central as which has

54:55 ↗ always been the Assumption and what

54:57 ↗ we've been Target or moving for with the

54:59 ↗ Target and so that's a lot of what we're

55:02 ↗ discussing primarily with a lot of the

55:04 ↗ Alternatives but we're looking at

55:06 ↗ different variations and and seeing

55:07 ↗ what's reasonable based on uh different

55:10 ↗ trends that we're seeing what's going on

55:11 ↗ in the region but also what also makes

55:13 ↗ sense for

55:15 ↗ is thank you I believe we see this

55:19 ↗ on yes yes the commission will see this

55:24 ↗ again okay well again thank you Mr

55:26 ↗ Kroger great presentation thank you

55:30 ↗ Commissioners and we are going to move

55:33 ↗ along

55:34 ↗ to Item

55:38 ↗ B and before Item B we will be

55:42 ↗ discussing the parks recreation trails

55:44 ↗ and open space element for the

55:46 ↗ comprehensive plan periodic update and

55:48 ↗ for this item is a quaz very own B

55:52 ↗ reporter our associate planner will be

55:54 ↗ presenting presenting

55:57 ↗ tonight give her a second

56:00 ↗ to comfortable up

56:06 ↗ there whenever you're ready Valerie

56:08 ↗ thank you chair Bo great

56:11 ↗ introduction good evening everyone my

56:13 ↗ name is Valerie Porter and I'm an

56:14 ↗ associate planner with Community

56:16 ↗ Planning and

56:20 ↗ Development start the

56:23 ↗ presentation

56:26 ↗ there we go so when looking at the goals

56:28 ↗ and

56:32 ↗ policies sorry I'm here to talk about

56:34 ↗ the parks recreation Trail and open

56:36 ↗ space element going forward for time I'm

56:39 ↗ just going to call it the parks

56:40 ↗ element so when looking at the goals and

56:43 ↗ policies for the parks element I want

56:45 ↗ everyone to consider the following

56:46 ↗ questions one does the commission have

56:49 ↗ any feedback on the proposed updates two

56:52 ↗ are the proposed goals and policies

56:54 ↗ consistent with the land use element

56:56 ↗ goals and policies and three are there

56:59 ↗ topics not being addressed in the

57:01 ↗ proposed goals and

57:03 ↗ policies so the parks department

57:06 ↗ developed a the park strategic plan in

57:09 ↗ 2018 and this document is a roadmap for

57:13 ↗ their Vision so um in this park plan it

57:17 ↗ references the goals and policies and

57:20 ↗ about a year later in 2019 the goals and

57:23 ↗ policies were also updated in the Parks

57:27 ↗ element so because the park element was

57:31 ↗ recently updated the park staff they're

57:33 ↗ not proposing many changes to the goals

57:35 ↗ and policies many of the policies and

57:38 ↗ goals are going to stay as they is as

57:39 ↗ they are today every five years the um

57:43 ↗ Park strategic plan is updated and it

57:45 ↗ just happens that their update for their

57:47 ↗ park strategic plan is going to occur at

57:50 ↗ the same time as a periodic

57:53 ↗ update so because of all the updates

57:56 ↗ with these documents Park staff um asked

57:59 ↗ their Parks Board you know what types of

58:02 ↗ changes would you like to see um or if

58:04 ↗ any changes would you like to see with

58:05 ↗ the goals um in the policies and so they

58:08 ↗ had a discussion and they talked about

58:09 ↗ what they'd like to see and these are

58:11 ↗ some of the goals that came out of that

58:13 ↗ they wanted to ensure that the park

58:15 ↗ system had a it was a balanced Park

58:17 ↗ system they also wanted to make sure

58:19 ↗ that the park that there was a planning

58:20 ↗ and design consideration um they also

58:23 ↗ wanted to make sure there was

58:24 ↗ environmental pres preservation um

58:27 ↗ Partnerships with um other organizations

58:30 ↗ and then there was also the policies

58:32 ↗ talked about maintenance and

58:37 ↗ stewardship so one thing I didn't

58:39 ↗ mention is that the park strategic plan

58:41 ↗ is actually going to be renamed to the

58:42 ↗ park system plan and so going forward

58:45 ↗ you'll be seeing that in some of the

58:47 ↗ documents after um Park staff talked to

58:49 ↗ the park Ford they came up with these

58:51 ↗ nine policies I'm not going to go

58:53 ↗ through all of the policies but if we

58:54 ↗ want a word Smith later I do have some

58:56 ↗ slides that we can go through but I just

58:58 ↗ wanted to let you know that only nine

59:00 ↗ policies came out of the park board

59:03 ↗ discussion and the proposed changes

59:05 ↗ addresses coordination with regional

59:06 ↗ visitors incorporating the native tribes

59:09 ↗ into the planning and the maintenance

59:10 ↗ process they also wanted to try to

59:13 ↗ include Ark into the park system and

59:15 ↗ then they also wanted to highlight some

59:16 ↗ of the programs that they're working on

59:18 ↗ so um the parks department is actually

59:21 ↗ in the process of uh drafting the urban

59:23 ↗ forest and management plan which will

59:24 ↗ soon be adopted and then they also have

59:26 ↗ the Heritage tree program so they wanted

59:28 ↗ a policy to address protecting those

59:33 ↗ trees so commissioner Kennedy provided

59:37 ↗ me an email um with some of the comments

59:40 ↗ of you know what she would like to see

59:42 ↗ um possible changes and so I'm just

59:44 ↗ going to briefly go over some of those

59:46 ↗ um possible changes because I did pass

59:49 ↗ that along to the park staff and we

59:51 ↗ thought we'd be proactive and try to

59:52 ↗ talk about some of those possible

59:54 ↗ changes so the first um issue brought up

59:58 ↗ was for um policy B6 um commissioner

1:00:02 ↗ kenned believed that the text needed to

1:00:04 ↗ be rewarded so that it was just a little

1:00:05 ↗ bit more definitive um staff agreed and

1:00:09 ↗ so to try to make um it the the the

1:00:12 ↗ policy a little bit more clear and have

1:00:14 ↗ some clear actions they're going to try

1:00:16 ↗ to establish some measurements that will

1:00:18 ↗ help then make the um policy a little

1:00:20 ↗ bit clearer after reviewing the policy

1:00:23 ↗ they also noticed that they felt like

1:00:24 ↗ the policy shouldn't be under um goal B

1:00:28 ↗ but instead be under goal um H which is

1:00:30 ↗ the level of

1:00:35 ↗ service another issue commissioner um

1:00:37 ↗ Kennedy brought up was they thought she

1:00:39 ↗ thought that that policy needs to be um

1:00:41 ↗ made more sense under the planning

1:00:43 ↗ section and so um planning policy or

1:00:47 ↗ parking Park policy 18 and 19 will be

1:00:50 ↗ relocated um under the subsection of

1:00:53 ↗ planning so it's going to stay under

1:00:54 ↗ gold D it's just a subsection of the

1:01:02 ↗ parking and then for policy D20

1:01:07 ↗ um commissioner Kennedy thought that um

1:01:10 ↗ this policy best um probably should have

1:01:13 ↗ been combined with the policy B6 because

1:01:17 ↗ it they both talk about the park system

1:01:19 ↗ and economic benefits staff would like

1:01:22 ↗ the the two policy to remain separate so

1:01:25 ↗ they're going to consider rewarding um

1:01:27 ↗ the text to make it a little bit clearer

1:01:29 ↗ so that it's a little bit the the policy

1:01:33 ↗ is a little bit more clear about what

1:01:34 ↗ they're trying to um

1:01:38 ↗ achieve and last there was a comment um

1:01:41 ↗ regarding

1:01:43 ↗ E8 and this policy talks about the

1:01:46 ↗ Heritage trees um you mentioned Comm

1:01:49 ↗ commissioner kenned mentioned that um

1:01:51 ↗ there should be a definition um possibly

1:01:54 ↗ outlined in this policy typically

1:01:56 ↗ definitions aren't in policies but I

1:01:58 ↗ agree that or staff agrees that there

1:02:01 ↗ should be a definition um kind of

1:02:03 ↗ explaining what this is and so I think

1:02:05 ↗ going forward what we're going to look

1:02:06 ↗ at is including a definition in the

1:02:08 ↗ isqua municipal code just because again

1:02:11 ↗ the comprehensive plan then um informs

1:02:14 ↗ the isqua municipal code and so that

1:02:17 ↗ will be a solution just to make it clear

1:02:19 ↗ about the next

1:02:21 ↗ steps so the policies um that staff

1:02:25 ↗ proposed these nine policies they go to

1:02:27 ↗ the Parks Board on November 27th they

1:02:30 ↗ reviewed it made a few edits and they

1:02:32 ↗ actually support um um support the

1:02:35 ↗ changes and then they recommend approval

1:02:37 ↗ for your guys' review so the next step

1:02:40 ↗ after um today's meeting will be to take

1:02:42 ↗ this to the council

1:02:45 ↗ committee and then here's just a quick

1:02:47 ↗ schedule just to let you know that we're

1:02:48 ↗ still in um on track to have the um comp

1:02:53 ↗ plan adopted the fourth quarter of

1:02:59 ↗ 2024 again I'm putting up the questions

1:03:02 ↗ um in case there's um any

1:03:05 ↗ questions but that concludes my

1:03:07 ↗ presentation and then again if we want

1:03:09 ↗ to go over any of the um the policies I

1:03:12 ↗ do have some slides so that we can look

1:03:14 ↗ at them a little bit

1:03:16 ↗ closer great thank you Valerie

1:03:19 ↗ commissioner CR first all thank you we

1:03:21 ↗ all love Parks all love par everyone

1:03:24 ↗ loves Parks can't have enough Parks um

1:03:27 ↗ and this is more of a question and it

1:03:29 ↗ you know you may it may be a broader

1:03:31 ↗ question so you may or may not have the

1:03:34 ↗ specific answer when you look at whether

1:03:37 ↗ it's Vision or goals um are our parks

1:03:41 ↗ and the Investments that we do for isqua

1:03:44 ↗ residents one of the one of them said

1:03:45 ↗ isqua residents or do we look at this as

1:03:50 ↗ um a core asset of isqua that brings

1:03:53 ↗ people regionally into isqua which then

1:03:55 ↗ would have an impact on economic

1:03:57 ↗ vitality and other things like that that

1:03:59 ↗ are important for isqua so um for

1:04:02 ↗ example then if you if you said that was

1:04:04 ↗ something that was that was part of the

1:04:06 ↗ vision then you will have um things that

1:04:10 ↗ you would do around you build a Music

1:04:12 ↗ Theater in Confluence Park how how do

1:04:14 ↗ you think about all the ball fields and

1:04:16 ↗ all of that for regional draw and all of

1:04:18 ↗ that so I'm curious It's like is this

1:04:20 ↗ for isqua or or Regional and if so

1:04:25 ↗ um how do you think about some of those

1:04:27 ↗ different

1:04:29 ↗ policies before I try to attempt first

1:04:33 ↗ I'm gonna fund it to Robin do you want

1:04:34 ↗ to try to answer that okay great

1:04:39 ↗ thanks okay can hear me okay hi Robin

1:04:43 ↗ Spar Park planning and development

1:04:44 ↗ manager and I can kind of answer a

1:04:47 ↗ little bit of that question but first

1:04:48 ↗ and foremost the park system plan is

1:04:50 ↗ meant for the residents of isqua and

1:04:53 ↗ that's our main focus Focus to make sure

1:04:55 ↗ that the the system really represents

1:04:57 ↗ the values and the needs of the

1:04:58 ↗ community first and foremost but because

1:05:01 ↗ we are surrounded by the state parks and

1:05:04 ↗ we are a thorough way you know we do

1:05:06 ↗ have to think of this regionally as well

1:05:09 ↗ um and that that mainly comes in and the

1:05:11 ↗ economic benefit the tourists that come

1:05:14 ↗ in um and support the downtown area

1:05:17 ↗ support Central isqua so first and

1:05:20 ↗ foremost you know our our main focus

1:05:22 ↗ really is the the resident

1:05:24 ↗ but we understand that there is an

1:05:26 ↗ impact and I think we see it with even

1:05:28 ↗ with Jacob the troll you know getting

1:05:30 ↗ visitors from Seattle getting visitors

1:05:32 ↗ from all over the area really it's a

1:05:34 ↗ it's a huge draw It's a Wonderful draw

1:05:36 ↗ it's an amazing amenity now um and it

1:05:40 ↗ it's becoming a great asset for us and

1:05:42 ↗ supplementing the downtown area so yeah

1:05:45 ↗ they they do go hand inand

1:05:50 ↗ certainly thank you

1:05:52 ↗ Robin thank you

1:05:58 ↗ so in Reading at least the the text I

1:06:01 ↗ was given to us we talk about um

1:06:04 ↗ planning and design as well as um

1:06:07 ↗ maintenance um where would like asset

1:06:10 ↗ planning come in like uh and I have kids

1:06:14 ↗ we go to the parks they play in the

1:06:17 ↗ playground um are you guys looking at

1:06:20 ↗ not necessarily just maintenance but uh

1:06:22 ↗ the life cycle of that equipment and

1:06:25 ↗ let's say in the next 5 years it needs

1:06:27 ↗ to be replaced or in the next 10 years

1:06:29 ↗ as well where would that be found um

1:06:32 ↗ within the

1:06:34 ↗ text I don't think that's really

1:06:36 ↗ addressed in the goals and policies I

1:06:38 ↗ feel like it's maybe more in the park

1:06:40 ↗ strategic plan it's more

1:06:44 ↗ or any idea I just don't think it's

1:06:47 ↗ addressed in at this level I think

1:06:49 ↗ that's something a little bit more

1:06:50 ↗ detailed okay I I think where I was

1:06:53 ↗ getting at is because we talk

1:06:54 ↗ maintenance but you can only maintain

1:06:56 ↗ something for so long so it's just maybe

1:07:00 ↗ in in a functional plan or whichever go

1:07:03 ↗ the next step to say hey from a policy

1:07:06 ↗ standpoint every 10 years we need to

1:07:10 ↗ renew um this asset or these types of

1:07:13 ↗ assets basically they have a plan for

1:07:16 ↗ and that that feeds into the actual

1:07:19 ↗ master plan aspect as well so you can

1:07:22 ↗ Program in those costs as well so there

1:07:26 ↗ thank

1:07:29 ↗ you yeah I I can certainly address that

1:07:32 ↗ um that is one thing that the the park

1:07:35 ↗ system plan is looking at holistically

1:07:38 ↗ overall the city overall um where are

1:07:40 ↗ our gaps where do we need new parks

1:07:42 ↗ where do uh some of the parks need to be

1:07:45 ↗ supplemented or renovated um that is

1:07:47 ↗ something park

1:07:49 ↗ operations um kind of follows and is

1:07:52 ↗ starting to track more closely ly uh

1:07:55 ↗ obviously it really depends on how how

1:07:57 ↗ much the park is used how much the

1:07:58 ↗ equipment is used um and how quickly it

1:08:03 ↗ it kind of erodes or or needs to be

1:08:05 ↗ replaced so that is definitely something

1:08:07 ↗ that we're keeping track of it is now in

1:08:10 ↗ the CIP plan um and so we'll we'll start

1:08:14 ↗ incorporating that into the system plan

1:08:16 ↗ and look at that in more detail thank

1:08:19 ↗ you and it's some some places I've seen

1:08:22 ↗ where it could someone Fallen underneath

1:08:25 ↗ maintenance to understand okay how long

1:08:27 ↗ you have to maintain something before

1:08:29 ↗ you have to replace it so it helps with

1:08:31 ↗ the planning of money later money

1:08:34 ↗ basically yeah definitely and that's

1:08:36 ↗ certain certainly something that we're

1:08:37 ↗ looking at you know and typically uh

1:08:39 ↗ Park playgrounds will last again

1:08:41 ↗ depending on how heavily they're used 10

1:08:43 ↗ to 15 years and it really depends on the

1:08:46 ↗ type of equipment um that was placed

1:08:48 ↗ there so thank

1:08:51 ↗ you Milligan

1:08:54 ↗ thank you valer can you put B6 back up

1:08:58 ↗ there thank you for the discussion and

1:09:00 ↗ thank you commissioner Kennedy for

1:09:01 ↗ bringing up some ideas what uh no that

1:09:04 ↗ the one that had the proposed the slide

1:09:08 ↗ that had the proposed changes oh or

1:09:10 ↗ actually you can go back to that if it

1:09:11 ↗ has the um goal does it does it have it

1:09:13 ↗ paired with the goal yeah that's what I

1:09:15 ↗ want okay so here's what um what's kind

1:09:17 ↗ of confusing me is that um what leads in

1:09:21 ↗ this if we read the goal the goal

1:09:23 ↗ doesn't say balance the interests of

1:09:25 ↗ isqua residents with regional needs it

1:09:29 ↗ says to

1:09:31 ↗ serve

1:09:33 ↗ opportunities and interests needs and

1:09:35 ↗ interests of isqua residents period and

1:09:38 ↗ then the new policy says that we're to

1:09:41 ↗ balance the needs while balancing

1:09:44 ↗ residential use with regional visitors

1:09:47 ↗ and where I don't um argue with the

1:09:49 ↗ economic benefit and measuring it and

1:09:50 ↗ all that I think that's really wonderful

1:09:52 ↗ I'm not arguing with any of those but um

1:09:53 ↗ when I read this I was thinking about

1:09:55 ↗ our Sports fields and um isqua Highlands

1:09:58 ↗ I remember the um

1:10:01 ↗ public uh there was a little bit of an

1:10:04 ↗ outcry shall I say uh about turning to

1:10:08 ↗ artificial turf so that we could serve

1:10:09 ↗ the needs of a regional demand for

1:10:12 ↗ sports Fields when we may when some of

1:10:14 ↗ those people myself included admittedly

1:10:17 ↗ uh might have preferred to have um

1:10:19 ↗ natural um a natural environment in our

1:10:22 ↗ parks

1:10:24 ↗ so to CH to add the policy not the

1:10:28 ↗ policy what is that yeah the policy at

1:10:30 ↗ the end that says that we're supposed to

1:10:32 ↗ balance

1:10:34 ↗ um Regional that says Regional visitors

1:10:38 ↗ and I think it's very careful to

1:10:39 ↗ distinguish it between that and I don't

1:10:41 ↗ know even how you would um

1:10:45 ↗ characterize Sports Fields as something

1:10:48 ↗ distinct and is there anything else like

1:10:50 ↗ that is that is that its own category or

1:10:52 ↗ is that a category of itself re Regional

1:10:55 ↗ visitors I believe are this you know the

1:10:56 ↗ troll and the trails and the but still

1:10:59 ↗ anyway I just bring it up as there's a

1:11:01 ↗ conflict between the goal and the

1:11:08 ↗ policy and you're you're you're speaking

1:11:10 ↗ specifically go be the balance Park

1:11:13 ↗ system yeah definitely and that's really

1:11:16 ↗ a real Hot Topic right now as athletic

1:11:18 ↗ fields um in the regional draw both

1:11:21 ↗ you'll see a lot of tournaments coming

1:11:23 ↗ in or the need for more tournaments so

1:11:26 ↗ it's something we're definitely looking

1:11:28 ↗ at um but again we're going back to

1:11:31 ↗ looking specifically at the needs of the

1:11:33 ↗ residents in the community first before

1:11:35 ↗ we look at any any Regional take on that

1:11:38 ↗ could it say that in that policy Robin

1:11:41 ↗ that we can adjust that for

1:11:43 ↗ sure that what you're looking for well I

1:11:46 ↗ think that the um the careful use of the

1:11:48 ↗ word visitors or tourism or something

1:11:52 ↗ that is more more about the economic

1:11:54 ↗ impact and that kind of use if that if

1:11:58 ↗ we're attracting that and not

1:12:00 ↗ necessarily being the

1:12:02 ↗ soccer um center of the East Side um

1:12:07 ↗ there could be a way of of refining that

1:12:10 ↗ so that it focuses on what I think it

1:12:12 ↗ comes down to First principles like what

1:12:14 ↗ is like there not not everything

1:12:16 ↗ is is the same priorities so I think if

1:12:20 ↗ you state you know Priority One is

1:12:24 ↗ parks for the esquare residents priority

1:12:28 ↗ two is having you know great resources

1:12:31 ↗ that

1:12:33 ↗ expand uh and you're right fields are

1:12:35 ↗ different than Investments you may make

1:12:38 ↗ for events and stuff like

1:12:40 ↗ that I think just being clear of your of

1:12:43 ↗ your priorities kind of solves solves

1:12:46 ↗ that commissioner s yeah I think I I

1:12:49 ↗ would piggy back on on that as well um

1:12:52 ↗ I'll use myself as as an example I go to

1:12:55 ↗ bellw my son plays soccer down there

1:12:59 ↗ sometimes with myself sometimes and I'll

1:13:02 ↗ go to a local business there and eat ice

1:13:06 ↗ cream after I go to the park same thing

1:13:08 ↗ as if I go to a park in Highlands I'll

1:13:10 ↗ go to um the cookie shop right up there

1:13:13 ↗ so that's that economic benefit and I'll

1:13:16 ↗ there so but to that prioritization of

1:13:19 ↗ course to the residents within isqua I

1:13:21 ↗ think that would be perent to prioritize

1:13:25 ↗ that maybe in the text and then second

1:13:28 ↗ to the to the regional visitors because

1:13:30 ↗ there will there will be Regional

1:13:31 ↗ visitors because 15 minutes down the

1:13:34 ↗ road you have a park um any in in any

1:13:38 ↗ direction per se so thank you great

1:13:42 ↗ comment I think we'll we'll bring that

1:13:44 ↗ back to the park board and and bring

1:13:45 ↗ that up and discuss it with them great

1:13:52 ↗ thanks

1:13:57 ↗ I'll go um chair

1:14:00 ↗ voice so the only concern anyone who's

1:14:03 ↗ known me on this commission will

1:14:05 ↗ probably uh see where I'm going to go

1:14:07 ↗ with this um I appreciate that there is

1:14:10 ↗ mentioned I believe it's in stewardship

1:14:12 ↗ and maintenance for safety I'm just

1:14:14 ↗ wondering if staff feels

1:14:17 ↗ like having it as policy F7 and f8 is

1:14:21 ↗ enough um I'll be the first to admit

1:14:24 ↗ isqua has done a tremendous job keeping

1:14:26 ↗ well-maintained and very safe Parks uh

1:14:28 ↗ looking around the region my concern is

1:14:32 ↗ that some of those things that have

1:14:34 ↗ happened to other cities starts to

1:14:35 ↗ trickle into isqua much the same way

1:14:38 ↗ crime has a little bit I was actually in

1:14:41 ↗ two establishments in isqua today that

1:14:43 ↗ both were broken in with their ATM

1:14:45 ↗ stolen um with these new ideas of

1:14:49 ↗ smashing cars into glass so you can see

1:14:52 ↗ some of the things that are happening in

1:14:53 ↗ bigger cities start to trickle into

1:14:54 ↗ isqua I'm just wondering because if

1:14:57 ↗ we're going to invest all of this time

1:14:59 ↗ and money into our Parks do we need to

1:15:01 ↗ make more of a mention um whether it

1:15:04 ↗ comes to drug abuse or vagrancies in our

1:15:07 ↗ Park um I do live right next to Rainer

1:15:10 ↗ Trail and there have been issues on that

1:15:12 ↗ trail this city has done a very good job

1:15:15 ↗ at addressing it but I do know people

1:15:17 ↗ that no longer use that trail at night

1:15:19 ↗ which is a real shame it's a beautiful

1:15:20 ↗ walk I used to walk it when I first

1:15:22 ↗ moved to that part of the uh town so I'm

1:15:26 ↗ just wondering the staff feel that's

1:15:27 ↗ enough just the one or two policies

1:15:30 ↗ mentioned I know some of this would be

1:15:31 ↗ codified in a different section but does

1:15:35 ↗ the park board feel that they've as far

1:15:37 ↗ as a goal and a policy they've made

1:15:39 ↗ mention enough of it by having it under

1:15:42 ↗ stewardship and

1:15:44 ↗ maintenance no that's a that's a really

1:15:47 ↗ good point and that's one I can

1:15:48 ↗ definitely bring up with with the rest

1:15:50 ↗ of the staff and then particularly the

1:15:52 ↗ planning staff and planning board uh we

1:15:54 ↗ do follow a practice called uh we call

1:15:56 ↗ it septe crime prevention through

1:15:58 ↗ environmental design so that is one

1:16:01 ↗ thing that we integrate and we do have

1:16:03 ↗ the the um fire sorry fire chief police

1:16:06 ↗ chief look at our design specifically

1:16:09 ↗ for that I know our maintenance staff

1:16:11 ↗ looks at that very closely and our

1:16:13 ↗ Ranger specifically is involved um

1:16:16 ↗ directly in quite a few of those um

1:16:19 ↗ reviews and incidences so it's something

1:16:22 ↗ that's always on the operations staff

1:16:23 ↗ mind is something they take very

1:16:25 ↗ seriously um as a planning staff we do

1:16:28 ↗ look at that at every Park to make sure

1:16:30 ↗ we actually just had a discussion about

1:16:32 ↗ pickle ball and the fencing and the

1:16:34 ↗ screening that goes up and making sure

1:16:37 ↗ that you know people can see into the

1:16:39 ↗ courts that's really important um so it

1:16:42 ↗ is something we integrate in in every

1:16:44 ↗ design to some extent but if you feel

1:16:47 ↗ strongly that that's something we need

1:16:48 ↗ to focus on more and make more of a

1:16:50 ↗ policy in in either the planning stage

1:16:53 ↗ or even in the implementation stage

1:16:55 ↗ that's something we can certainly it's

1:16:57 ↗ something I definitely like to hear more

1:16:58 ↗ from The Parks Board um if it's

1:17:00 ↗ something on their mind again the city's

1:17:02 ↗ done a tremendous job uh but you know

1:17:05 ↗ again I'm just seeing Trends from larger

1:17:07 ↗ cities and again hopefully we can combat

1:17:10 ↗ them but I am starting to see other

1:17:12 ↗ things and again I've lived by Rainer

1:17:14 ↗ Trail for eight years and I know there

1:17:16 ↗ have been problems with that particular

1:17:18 ↗ uh Trail and again isqua is very well

1:17:22 ↗ known for our parks Trails so I just

1:17:24 ↗ want to make sure that that is top of

1:17:25 ↗ Mind especially when we're investing all

1:17:27 ↗ this time and money and treasure into

1:17:30 ↗ these parks and trail system so I just

1:17:32 ↗ I'd like to hear the park board what

1:17:34 ↗ they have to say about it more than

1:17:35 ↗ anything I mean they're the ones who

1:17:37 ↗ study this

1:17:44 ↗ closely any other

1:17:46 ↗ questions I think Valerie you have more

1:17:48 ↗ questions for us

1:17:50 ↗ correct no I do not no

1:17:54 ↗ okay um commissioner is going once going

1:17:59 ↗ twice well thank you Valerie appreciate

1:18:01 ↗ the presentation did you get what you

1:18:04 ↗ needed I did thank you okay excellent

1:18:07 ↗ thank

1:18:08 ↗ you now moving to our last last item of

1:18:11 ↗ business for

1:18:14 ↗ 2023 uh we'll be looking at

1:18:16 ↗ 2024 with our crystal ball and with our

1:18:20 ↗ senior planner Steven Padua um who will

1:18:23 ↗ be presenting so Stephen when you're

1:18:26 ↗ ready please go

1:18:32 ↗ ahead thank you to your

1:18:38 ↗ voice the work I don't have a fancy

1:18:41 ↗ presentation for our last topic for 2023

1:18:44 ↗ but uh as chairo said it's primarily to

1:18:47 ↗ look at

1:18:51 ↗ 2024

1:18:54 ↗ very clear okay so uh for those of you

1:18:57 ↗ that were able to take a look at the

1:19:00 ↗ schedule for early

1:19:01 ↗ 20124 we're trying to keep it a little

1:19:03 ↗ light not necessarily because we don't

1:19:05 ↗ have topics for you it's primarily

1:19:08 ↗ because we want to be able to reserve

1:19:09 ↗ the time to have follow-up discussions

1:19:10 ↗ on either new policies or policies that

1:19:13 ↗ are still in discussion with the the pte

1:19:16 ↗ council committee and we want to make

1:19:18 ↗ sure we have adequate time to do that um

1:19:21 ↗ before we start rolling into the

1:19:23 ↗ legislative process with Council and and

1:19:25 ↗ once we start that we're I mean we're

1:19:27 ↗ aiming for a public hearing for the

1:19:30 ↗ docket in January and then you'll have

1:19:33 ↗ another public hearing on the Pioneer

1:19:35 ↗ project so I'll follow up from your

1:19:37 ↗ November 15th uh Joint Commission

1:19:39 ↗ meeting um to look at what we have

1:19:42 ↗ planned for that project and then we're

1:19:44 ↗ going to be probably this schedule get

1:19:47 ↗ updated in January and we'll have

1:19:49 ↗ specific policy discussions because

1:19:51 ↗ we're still working through the draft

1:19:52 ↗ drafting phase and still trying to look

1:19:55 ↗ at the coordination between the

1:19:56 ↗ different elements we want to be able to

1:19:58 ↗ identify what new policy discussions we

1:20:00 ↗ need to have with you and we're just not

1:20:01 ↗ ready to do that at this time so those

1:20:04 ↗ times are reserved for a lot of those

1:20:06 ↗ policy discussions early next year um

1:20:08 ↗ there's going to be a new topic that we

1:20:10 ↗ be bringing to you um we're getting

1:20:13 ↗ recommendations from Arch uh that so

1:20:15 ↗ we'll be bring actually some new policy

1:20:17 ↗ discussions for you probably around

1:20:20 ↗ February March time frame and then we

1:20:22 ↗ going to be going for the public hearing

1:20:24 ↗ for the comprehensive plan and then

1:20:26 ↗ going into the legislative process with

1:20:28 ↗ Council for the comprehensive plan after

1:20:31 ↗ that we're going to start kicking off

1:20:33 ↗ discussions on um annual housekeeping

1:20:36 ↗ for code updates and then starting to

1:20:38 ↗ have our housing program discussion so

1:20:41 ↗ looking at a lot of those um housing uh

1:20:45 ↗ multif family tax

1:20:47 ↗ in exemption the U looking at housing

1:20:51 ↗ regulations a lot lot of the followup to

1:20:54 ↗ the housing report that was released

1:20:55 ↗ earlier this year to look at what do we

1:20:57 ↗ need to look at to try to drive more

1:21:00 ↗ development residential development U

1:21:02 ↗ within Central

1:21:06 ↗ Isa there was a lot thrown out just for

1:21:08 ↗ the two halves of the year is there any

1:21:10 ↗ questions if you were able to take a

1:21:12 ↗ look at the work

1:21:14 ↗ plan I'll just bring up something real

1:21:16 ↗ quickly uh Stephen so this year the city

1:21:20 ↗ is this coming year the city is now

1:21:22 ↗ implementing cultural holidays so that

1:21:25 ↗ means on the ones that do fall on our

1:21:27 ↗ PPC meetings we're going to obviously

1:21:30 ↗ observe those holidays we won't be

1:21:31 ↗ meeting is the idea right now because it

1:21:34 ↗ we don't know what our schedule's going

1:21:35 ↗ to look like would we try to reschedule

1:21:39 ↗ those

1:21:39 ↗ meetings right now we would assess prior

1:21:43 ↗ to the each of those meetings at least a

1:21:45 ↗ couple months prior to those meetings to

1:21:46 ↗ see if we need them okay um for now you

1:21:49 ↗ can assume they're cancelled unless

1:21:51 ↗ we're and and we'll give you plenty of

1:21:54 ↗ um time beforehand to identify whether

1:21:56 ↗ or not we need to actually keep those

1:21:58 ↗ meetings or not or reschedule them um

1:22:00 ↗ but yes we actually implemented the

1:22:02 ↗ cultural holidays in 2023 and so that's

1:22:05 ↗ that actually impacted some of our

1:22:06 ↗ meetings but because of the timing of

1:22:08 ↗ our meetings being on uh the second and

1:22:10 ↗ fourth Thursdays we weren't as impacted

1:22:13 ↗ as much as some of the other boards of

1:22:14 ↗ commission so you didn't see as many

1:22:16 ↗ changes on your schedule you're seeing a

1:22:18 ↗ little more impacts in 2024 right I just

1:22:20 ↗ didn't know if like the city just takes

1:22:22 ↗ it as a net loss or if we still want

1:22:25 ↗ those two meetings a month and the idea

1:22:27 ↗ the your point now

1:22:29 ↗ answer yeah and and because we have so

1:22:31 ↗ many boards commissions and needs for

1:22:33 ↗ council chambers it's it gets more and

1:22:35 ↗ more difficult to find a new time

1:22:38 ↗ especially balancing all of your heavy

1:22:40 ↗ schedules and so we want to be able to

1:22:42 ↗ respect that and the commitment that you

1:22:44 ↗ made to the second and fourth Thursdays

1:22:46 ↗ as as Commissioners and but if we do see

1:22:48 ↗ a need for a topic to go to you for

1:22:51 ↗ discussion and we can't delay it or

1:22:53 ↗ bring it forward we'll look to then

1:22:56 ↗ reschedule any of those plus we lost a

1:22:59 ↗ city

1:23:00 ↗ hall lost one of our meeting spaces we

1:23:02 ↗ lost one of the buildings yes but we

1:23:04 ↗ have we have plenty of other meeting

1:23:06 ↗ spaces that we're able to use and um if

1:23:08 ↗ needed we could always meet at tippet

1:23:10 ↗ Creek Manor to as an alternative to

1:23:13 ↗ meeting in the council

1:23:16 ↗ chambers that was my only observation

1:23:18 ↗ yeah commissioner Milligan I just have a

1:23:21 ↗ little question about the um

1:23:23 ↗ can you scroll up for me to the top um

1:23:25 ↗ the

1:23:26 ↗ docket you remind me and I think the

1:23:29 ↗ account plan docket is going to be

1:23:31 ↗ different this year because of the

1:23:32 ↗ changes that we made last year so it

1:23:35 ↗ won't have the same kind of things yes

1:23:39 ↗ for this dock it'll primarily be the

1:23:41 ↗ comprehensive plan and what's being

1:23:42 ↗ proposed within it um at at kind of the

1:23:44 ↗ broad level that should be within the

1:23:46 ↗ docket and so that's as a reminder the

1:23:48 ↗ docket is just the approval what'll go

1:23:50 ↗ into that comp plan Amendment for the

1:23:52 ↗ year

1:23:53 ↗ oh so it's not going to be the

1:23:56 ↗ individual any individual items that we

1:23:59 ↗ have seen in the

1:24:01 ↗ past outside of the comprehensive plan

1:24:03 ↗ yeah were they um what am I thinking of

1:24:05 ↗ the docket that would have the zoning

1:24:07 ↗ changes and those other things where is

1:24:09 ↗ that that's typically where you would

1:24:10 ↗ see it is on the docket but we didn't

1:24:12 ↗ actually have any proposed zoning

1:24:14 ↗ changes um from any external parties but

1:24:17 ↗ that if if we do have any that's where

1:24:19 ↗ you would see it is on the docket yeah

1:24:21 ↗ and and then so then my follow question

1:24:22 ↗ was this is the public hearing and so

1:24:24 ↗ when is um notice of the proposed

1:24:28 ↗ docket

1:24:32 ↗ published their

1:24:37 ↗ head it's not the Friday before right

1:24:40 ↗ something like two weeks or something

1:24:42 ↗ yeah

1:24:44 ↗ okay valer is confirmed it's two

1:24:51 ↗ weeks

1:24:53 ↗ any other questions on the work

1:24:55 ↗ plan any topics that our commissioners

1:24:59 ↗ feel might be

1:25:05 ↗ important like whatever you guys throw

1:25:07 ↗ at

1:25:10 ↗ us he's not gonna ask that next year

1:25:14 ↗ nothing you you'll be pretty busy next

1:25:16 ↗ year but I just I like to ask that

1:25:17 ↗ question if there's any raising

1:25:21 ↗ topics yeah um I don't know if this is

1:25:24 ↗ some of what's in the second

1:25:27 ↗ half back up um but like are there on

1:25:31 ↗ the functional plan piece are is any of

1:25:34 ↗ that under development next year I know

1:25:36 ↗ there's like the housing stuff but would

1:25:38 ↗ that come to us as are being

1:25:42 ↗ developed yes as as it impacts any goals

1:25:45 ↗ or policies within the comprehensive

1:25:46 ↗ plan or if there's a land use or housing

1:25:50 ↗ component uh that's impacted by By

1:25:52 ↗ changes to any functional plans then yes

1:25:54 ↗ we would be bringing that to planning

1:25:56 ↗ policy commission for for feedback and

1:25:58 ↗ revie so it's really just if there's an

1:26:02 ↗ impact on

1:26:04 ↗ comprehens the plans themselves correct

1:26:08 ↗ but at the same time we like to use a

1:26:10 ↗ lot of our volunteer groups that being

1:26:12 ↗ the boards of commissions to provide a

1:26:14 ↗ lot of the uh diverse feedback from the

1:26:16 ↗ community on and any any of our

1:26:18 ↗ functional plans that we

1:26:21 ↗ updated

1:26:25 ↗ all right that looks like into comments

1:26:27 ↗ well thank you Stephen but don't go

1:26:30 ↗ anywhere because now we'd like to

1:26:32 ↗ discuss with that being the end of our

1:26:34 ↗ regular business um any city council

1:26:37 ↗ updates or

1:26:40 ↗ announcement suppose I can just stay

1:26:42 ↗ right

1:26:43 ↗ here um there is a few Council updates

1:26:46 ↗ for you tonight so the um I had

1:26:49 ↗ mentioned that there's going to be

1:26:50 ↗ continued discussion with City Council

1:26:52 ↗ in January or with you all um in January

1:26:56 ↗ for the public hearing on the Pioneer

1:26:57 ↗ project program and so at that meeting

1:26:59 ↗ you'll get a presentation on what we're

1:27:02 ↗ proposing for the program as a follow-up

1:27:04 ↗ from you all but Council uh earlier this

1:27:07 ↗ week if you want to see the discussion

1:27:08 ↗ they discussed the Pioneer project

1:27:10 ↗ program the feedback you had provided

1:27:12 ↗ and as well as giving some guidance to

1:27:14 ↗ staff of how to frame that program and

1:27:16 ↗ present it um for you all next year as

1:27:19 ↗ for Council and then the other piece was

1:27:23 ↗ in uh for the public hearings you will

1:27:26 ↗ get a lot of the information presenting

1:27:28 ↗ what the details are for the program and

1:27:31 ↗ then for the docket for that public

1:27:32 ↗ hearing also explaining what'll be

1:27:34 ↗ proposed for the compl Amendments um at

1:27:36 ↗ a broad level for the comprehens plan as

1:27:38 ↗ well as if there's

1:27:41 ↗ any great thank

1:27:43 ↗ you all right um I think the final piece

1:27:47 ↗ for this evening for PPC for 2023

1:27:52 ↗ is last minute

1:27:55 ↗ announcements um I know Stephen we have

1:27:57 ↗ a small party to attend to anyone that

1:28:00 ↗ wants to attend it this coming Wednesday

1:28:03 ↗ correct yes uh for those that perhaps

1:28:06 ↗ didn't see uh the email invite you're

1:28:08 ↗ all invited to the end of the year party

1:28:12 ↗ uh that uh the economic Vitality

1:28:14 ↗ commission is holding and I will send

1:28:17 ↗ that email again uh if you would all

1:28:19 ↗ like to join and please let me know if

1:28:21 ↗ you are interested Ed in joining just so

1:28:23 ↗ we can track

1:28:25 ↗ Forum thank you Stephen is there

1:28:27 ↗ anything else from the

1:28:31 ↗ Commissioners all right I have one last

1:28:33 ↗ thing sure you know end of the year I

1:28:35 ↗ mean the work doesn't stop we as you saw

1:28:37 ↗ from the 2024 work plan the work

1:28:40 ↗ continues um but I do really appreciate

1:28:43 ↗ a lot of the work that the commission

1:28:44 ↗ has put into the work plan that we have

1:28:47 ↗ um for the conference plan sometimes it

1:28:49 ↗ can be hard to go through that high

1:28:51 ↗ level of of detail for uh plan

1:28:55 ↗ development or discussions and it it

1:28:57 ↗ gets a little more interesting next year

1:28:59 ↗ as we dive into regulation updates and

1:29:02 ↗ we really appreciate the commission's

1:29:03 ↗ patience as well as a lot of the

1:29:05 ↗ feedback you provide for a lot of the

1:29:06 ↗ meetings and I just want to say thank

1:29:08 ↗ you on behalf of a lot of the planning

1:29:10 ↗ staff that appreciated a lot of the

1:29:12 ↗ discussions we've had in council

1:29:13 ↗ chambers with you

1:29:15 ↗ all well thank you

1:29:17 ↗ Stephen and I guess on behalf of the

1:29:20 ↗ commission I want to thank our awesome

1:29:22 ↗ staff I want to thank Sarah and Robin

1:29:26 ↗ for attending this evening but also

1:29:28 ↗ planning policy staff Kristen Valerie

1:29:31 ↗ Thomas Jared Tim chance and of course

1:29:34 ↗ Stephen again Commissioners all of you

1:29:37 ↗ for your time and your dedication to our

1:29:39 ↗ wonderful City and I hope you all have a

1:29:42 ↗ uh happy holidays uh have happy New Year

1:29:46 ↗ tonight's the first night of Hanukkah

1:29:47 ↗ for those who are

1:29:49 ↗ celebrating and a great rest of 201 23

1:29:52 ↗ and looking forward to 2024 with all of

1:29:55 ↗ you so thank you good

1:29:59 ↗ evening

Approved minutes

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

Open PDF

Attendance

Council / Members (7)

Voiss

Vice-Chair Bader

Commissioners Esemuede

Kennedy

Krass

Milligan

Patterson

Staff (2)

Sara Diekroeger, Planning Consultant Stephen Padua, Long Range Planning Manager Valerie Porter, Associate Planner Robin Spear, Parks Planning

Development Manager 2. Approval of Minutes a) Minutes of 11-09-23 Commissioner Milligan stated that a typing error would be brought to the attention of Padua. With no other comments or concerns, the Minutes were approved. b) Minutes of 11-15-23 With no comments or concerns, the Minutes were approved. 3