Planning Policy Commission · Thursday, April 10, 2025 · City Council Digest

2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES

Minutes of March 27, 2025

packet pp.3–9

▶ Watch from 0:36 Open packet at p.3 ↗

Staff report:

MINUTES PLANNING POLICY COMMISSION 6:30 p.m. – Thursday, March 27, 2025

4. REGULAR BUSINESS

Chair and Vice-Chair Election

Action · 15 min · 6:50 PM Valerie Porter, Associate Planner · packet pp.11–12

Topics: Elections

▶ Watch from 57:28 Open packet at p.11 ↗

Staff report:

Community Planning & Development P.O. Box 1307 Issaquah, WA 98027 425-837-3450 issaquahwa.gov

Rules and Regulations Review

Action · 15 min · 7:05 PM Tisha Gieser, City Clerk · packet pp.13–23

▶ Watch from 1:12:28 Open packet at p.13 ↗

Staff report:

Each year, following an election of Chair and Vice-Chair, the Commission is provided an opportunity to review the Rules and Regulations.

Planning 101

Information · 30 min · 7:20 PM Christen Leeson, Principal Planner · packet pp.25–26

▶ Watch from 1:27:28 Open packet at p.25 ↗

Staff report:

The purpose of this topic is to review and understand the role of planning, planning in Issaquah, and the role of the Planning Policy Commission.

Title 18 Policy Amendments

Discussion · 20 min · 7:50 PM Christen Leeson, Principal Planner · packet pp.27–35

Topics: Land Use

▶ Watch from 1:57:28 Open packet at p.27 ↗

Staff report:

The Planning Policy Commission (PPC) will review, discuss, and provide feedback on some of the proposed 2025 policy amendments to Title 18, Land Use Code.

5. REPORTS

Council Update

6. OTHER BUSINESS / ANNOUNCEMENTS

Upcoming Schedule

packet pp.37–38

▶ Watch from 51:46 Open packet at p.37 ↗

Staff report:

Staff Support: Stephen Padua Staff Support: Christen Leeson 4/10/25 4/24/25  Chairs Election  Title 18 Annual Policy Amendments  Rules and Regulations Review

1453 segments .txt ↗

0:04 ↗ Well, good evening everyone. I want to

0:06 ↗ thank you for uh bearing with us uh

0:08 ↗ through some technical difficulty

0:10 ↗ difficulties to our viewing public. Um

0:13 ↗ I'd like to call this meeting of the

0:14 ↗ planning policy commission to order and

0:16 ↗ it currently is 6:36 p.m. Today's

0:20 ↗ meeting is a hybrid meeting. The

0:22 ↗ planning policy commission is in person,

0:24 ↗ but staff or members of the public may

0:26 ↗ be attending virtually or in person. Uh

0:29 ↗ Kristen, do we have a quorum this

0:31 ↗ evening? Yes, we do. All right. Thank

0:33 ↗ you. So, the first item of business this

0:36 ↗ evening is to approve the minutes of our

0:39 ↗ March 27th meeting. Are there any

0:41 ↗ corrections to the draft March 27th

0:44 ↗ meeting minutes provided in your

0:48 ↗ packet? Hearing none, those meeting

0:50 ↗ minutes are approved. And Commissioner

0:52 ↗ Adair, if you could turn your camera

1:02 ↗ on. Okay, we're going to move on to

1:05 ↗ public

1:06 ↗ comment. Amanda, has anyone signed up

1:09 ↗ for public comment this evening? No,

1:11 ↗ chair. There are no signins for public

1:13 ↗ comment. Okay. Thank

1:17 ↗ you. All right. Right. So, our first

1:19 ↗ item of business this evening is the

1:20 ↗ chair and vice chair

1:23 ↗ elections.

1:24 ↗ Um, we do have four different items of

1:27 ↗ business. It's going to little bit more

1:30 ↗ items than to normal, but it is kind of

1:31 ↗ a light lift uh other than some policy

1:34 ↗ discussion towards the end, but we're

1:36 ↗ going to kick it off with our chair and

1:37 ↗ vice chair elections. And the way this

1:40 ↗ process is going to work is first I will

1:43 ↗ call for nominations. And when all of

1:45 ↗ those nominations have been made, we'll

1:47 ↗ close those nominations. If only one

1:49 ↗ nomination is made, that member is

1:51 ↗ considered elected to the position by

1:53 ↗ unanimous consent. If multiple

1:56 ↗ nominations are made for a position,

1:58 ↗ we'll hold time at our next meeting for

2:00 ↗ an election process. At that meeting,

2:03 ↗ commissioners will have the opportunity

2:05 ↗ to discuss the nominees. will then ask

2:08 ↗ commissioners to cast votes on the

2:09 ↗ nominees in the order that they were

2:11 ↗ nominated by a roll call a roll call

2:14 ↗ vote. Commissioners may vote for only

2:17 ↗ one nominee, but they may vote for

2:19 ↗ themselves. The first commissioner

2:21 ↗ receiving a majority vote is elected to

2:23 ↗ the position and we will repeat that

2:25 ↗ entire process for the vice chair as

2:27 ↗ well. So, we will begin. Are there any

2:30 ↗ nominations for

2:33 ↗ chair? Uh, Commissioner Crass, I

2:36 ↗ nominate uh uh Jason Voice for a chair.

2:41 ↗ Are there any other nominations?

2:48 ↗ All right. By unanimous consent. Thank

2:50 ↗ you, Katya. Um, yeah, thank you very

2:54 ↗ much. I appreciate it. It's been great

2:56 ↗ to be your chair this past year. I'm

2:57 ↗ looking forward to the next year working

2:59 ↗ with our new commissioners as well as

3:01 ↗ with our older commissioners. It's a

3:04 ↗ great privilege and I tell people quite

3:06 ↗ often it's the best job in Isiqua and I

3:08 ↗ truly believe that. So we have a lot of

3:10 ↗ fun here at this particular commission

3:12 ↗ and uh yeah looking forward to this next

3:15 ↗ year. So thank

3:17 ↗ you. Now we are going to move on to vice

3:20 ↗ chair. So same process. Are there any

3:23 ↗ nominations for the vice chair? Uh

3:25 ↗ commissioner Zachro. Thank you. I

3:28 ↗ nominate the current vice chair Jesse

3:29 ↗ Patterson.

3:31 ↗ Are there any other

3:37 ↗ nominees? All right. Well, by unanimous

3:39 ↗ consent, congratulations. Vice Chair

3:41 ↗ Patterson, is there anything you'd like

3:43 ↗ to say?

3:45 ↗ I'll just say thank you. I appreciate

3:46 ↗ the opportunity. Uh I've been doing this

3:50 ↗ role for a couple months now and I've

3:51 ↗ really enjoyed uh being able to support

3:53 ↗ Jason as chair as well as representing

3:56 ↗ our our commission as well. So looking

3:58 ↗ forward to continuing that for the next

3:59 ↗ year.

4:02 ↗ All right. Thank you, Vice Chair

4:03 ↗ Patterson, and thank you,

4:05 ↗ commissioners. Okay, this correlates,

4:08 ↗ but this is going to be um presented by

4:12 ↗ our city clerk and this is going to be

4:15 ↗ our rules and regulations, which we

4:17 ↗ basically update once a year after the

4:19 ↗ election of chair and vice chair. This

4:22 ↗ evening, uh city clerk Tisha Gizer will

4:25 ↗ be um presenting. So, Tisha, when you're

4:28 ↗ ready, please go ahead.

4:34 ↗ Hi, planning commission members. My name

4:35 ↗ is Tisha Geyser, city clerk. It's nice

4:37 ↗ to see you again. And just so you're

4:39 ↗ aware, it does sound like our alternate

4:41 ↗ member may not be able to hear the room

4:44 ↗ right now. So, we're working on that,

4:46 ↗ but um wanted you to be aware of that.

4:48 ↗ Um, so the planning policy commission

4:51 ↗ has a very healthy practice of putting

4:54 ↗ their rules and regulations on the

4:55 ↗ agenda once a year just sort of so you

4:58 ↗ see that they exist. You can look

5:00 ↗ through them if you'd like to and uh the

5:04 ↗ uh Steven Padua reach always reaches out

5:06 ↗ to the clerk's office to say is there

5:08 ↗ anything that you know you'd like us to

5:10 ↗ consider changing this year um which I

5:12 ↗ really appreciate because it means

5:13 ↗ you're you're following these um which

5:15 ↗ is how it is intended. Uh so uh there

5:18 ↗ are a few minor things that I wanted to

5:21 ↗ propose to you tonight. These are just

5:23 ↗ some minor kind of cleanup provisions.

5:25 ↗ Uh the first one is that and this comes

5:27 ↗ up at multiple of our advisory boards

5:29 ↗ and commissions is whether an alternate

5:31 ↗ can serve as a chair or vice chair. And

5:34 ↗ our sort of policy has been that no they

5:38 ↗ can't but it isn't in writing anywhere.

5:40 ↗ And so uh we added a set are proposing

5:43 ↗ that uh a sentence be added to the

5:45 ↗ officer section to clarify that. Uh the

5:48 ↗ second change is regarding some language

5:51 ↗ that's and it's in a lot of places a lot

5:53 ↗ of our advisory boards and some of our

5:55 ↗ city council rules. Um but we'd like to

5:57 ↗ take the opportunity to improve yours.

5:59 ↗ Um, your conflict of interest language

6:01 ↗ says that if you have a conflict of

6:03 ↗ interest on an item before the

6:05 ↗ commission that a majority of the

6:07 ↗ commission has to vote to allow you to

6:10 ↗ not vote. Um, as you can imagine, that's

6:14 ↗ that's a little uh, in my opinion, a

6:16 ↗ little strange. If you have a financial

6:18 ↗ conflict of interest under state law,

6:20 ↗ you're not you're supposed to recuse

6:21 ↗ yourself from voting on that issue

6:23 ↗ regardless of whether a majority of the

6:25 ↗ commission agrees with that or not. So,

6:27 ↗ uh, the proposed language would remove

6:29 ↗ that and just say if you are are

6:31 ↗ determined to have a conflict of

6:33 ↗ interest and if you're unsure, we always

6:35 ↗ recommend you reach out to CPD staff who

6:38 ↗ can put you in touch with our city

6:39 ↗ attorney to talk through. Um, but that

6:41 ↗ you would uh leave the room for that

6:44 ↗ portion of the meeting and not be part

6:46 ↗ of voting on the issue. And the proposed

6:49 ↗ rules also include a few common commonly

6:52 ↗ um I don't what's the right way to say

6:54 ↗ this? a few uh situations that are not

6:58 ↗ conflicts because often individuals

7:00 ↗ think they may have a conflict. It's not

7:02 ↗ and they are still allowed to vote under

7:04 ↗ state law. If you have a situation like

7:07 ↗ that, you have a relationship with a

7:09 ↗ nonprofit. This isn't likely to happen

7:10 ↗ with the planning commission, but it

7:12 ↗ could, I suppose.

7:13 ↗ Um, you do not have to abstain from

7:16 ↗ voting just because you're on a board,

7:17 ↗ but you may choose to put that on the

7:20 ↗ record and say before you take action on

7:23 ↗ an item. Um, just for on the record, I'd

7:26 ↗ like to share that I have this

7:28 ↗ relationship with this entity and I have

7:30 ↗ it has been determined this isn't a

7:32 ↗ conflict of interest, so I'll be voting.

7:34 ↗ So, I just described two scenarios to

7:36 ↗ you. one where you have a conflict of

7:38 ↗ interest under state law in which you

7:40 ↗ would leave the room and the second uh

7:42 ↗ under which you would just uh kind of

7:44 ↗ for the minutes or whatever you would

7:46 ↗ just sort of put on the record your

7:47 ↗ conflict of interest and the section in

7:49 ↗ the rules now spells that out more

7:51 ↗ clearly um and provides for what I think

7:55 ↗ is an improved process.

7:57 ↗ The third change that we are proposing

7:59 ↗ is something else that's been in our

8:02 ↗ documents as a city for a long time and

8:04 ↗ I suspect it started when our city was

8:06 ↗ much smaller and uh people maybe were

8:09 ↗ uncomfortable voting on hard issues. So

8:13 ↗ it's a rule related to abstaining. So uh

8:17 ↗ under Robert's rules when you abstain

8:18 ↗ from voting you don't vote. You just

8:21 ↗ haven't voted at all. But isquas had

8:23 ↗ this unique rule. Again, it's pervasive

8:26 ↗ in our uh rules for our advisory boards

8:29 ↗ and council that if you abstain, it's

8:31 ↗ considered to have been a yes vote. But

8:33 ↗ a lot of times commissioners don't

8:35 ↗ understand that. That's a nuance that is

8:36 ↗ aqua has. And so, uh I'm recommending

8:39 ↗ that that be removed and that if you

8:40 ↗ choose to abstain from voting, you just

8:43 ↗ don't vote. Now, we encourage you to

8:46 ↗ vote. um we want seven people voting on

8:50 ↗ these issues, but if for some reason uh

8:53 ↗ it is a problem for you to do so and

8:57 ↗ you're present at the meeting and you're

8:59 ↗ a regular member, you could choose to

9:01 ↗ abstain, but you would need to verbalize

9:03 ↗ that because uh as you've probably

9:05 ↗ heard, the chair isn't calling for

9:07 ↗ abstensions. So during the debate, you

9:09 ↗ would want to be on the record as

9:11 ↗ saying, "I plan to abstain from the vote

9:13 ↗ for one reason or another.

9:22 ↗ Oh, I can't tell if my flag is up.

9:25 ↗ My looked at me. Is my Okay. Um, so what

9:32 ↗ if there is a tie vote? So therefore, an

9:35 ↗ abstension would be a no vote. If you've

9:38 ↗ got seven people voting, that may be why

9:41 ↗ the abstension was a yes vote.

9:44 ↗ Well, there's there's lots of reasons

9:46 ↗ that it could have been a yes vote, but

9:48 ↗ yes, there's there's implications here.

9:50 ↗ So, there's implications when you

9:52 ↗ abstain from voting that can impact the

9:54 ↗ outcome of the vote. Yes. Because it

9:56 ↗ also reduces your vote threshold. So,

9:59 ↗ let's say that there um you have

10:01 ↗ wonderful attendance tonight, but let's

10:03 ↗ say there were only uh six of you in

10:06 ↗ attendance, six members total in

10:09 ↗ attendance at a meeting. To pass a

10:11 ↗ measure, to pass a recommendation on to

10:13 ↗ the city council, you need a majority of

10:15 ↗ those six members, which would be four.

10:17 ↗ Majority of those present in voting,

10:18 ↗ that'd be four members. But if one of

10:20 ↗ the six decided to abstain, a majority

10:22 ↗ of those present in voting would only

10:24 ↗ need to be a majority of five, which

10:26 ↗ would be three votes. So, it has

10:28 ↗ impacts. Abstaining has impacts and

10:30 ↗ we're certainly not recommending it, but

10:32 ↗ I do think um when people the general

10:34 ↗ understanding of an abstension is that

10:36 ↗ you're not on record. And so I do see

10:39 ↗ that it's a bit confusing as the rule is

10:42 ↗ now because me a member could abstain

10:44 ↗ not realizing how it's impacting the

10:46 ↗ vote. So if there was an So if you have

10:50 ↗ two alternates seated Mhm. then and a

10:53 ↗ regular member abstains, would it not

10:56 ↗ make sense for an alternate then to then

10:58 ↗ vote because that would standardize the

11:02 ↗ yes nos? I think that's a wonderful idea

11:04 ↗ and I think if I think first of all I

11:07 ↗ think the situation is uh hopefully not

11:09 ↗ highly uh common but yes I think as a

11:13 ↗ member if you knew there was an issue on

11:14 ↗ your agenda that you weren't comfortable

11:16 ↗ voting on you might consider uh either

11:19 ↗ not being present for part of the

11:20 ↗ meeting or checking with staff to see

11:22 ↗ about or the chair about an alternate

11:24 ↗ serving in your seat. Our rules don't

11:26 ↗ your rules don't really provide for

11:27 ↗ that. They say an alternate member

11:29 ↗ serves in the absence of a regular

11:30 ↗ member. So technically you'd need to not

11:32 ↗ be here um for them to uh move into your

11:37 ↗ chair and vote, but yes. So could you

11:40 ↗ change the language to read absence of a

11:43 ↗ member or

11:44 ↗ abstension? Just simply insert the words

11:47 ↗ or abstension.

11:48 ↗ Um you you could do that. I see a few

11:52 ↗ issues with that possibly um which is

11:55 ↗ that if an alternate you know was coming

11:57 ↗ to a meeting not prepared to vote on a

12:00 ↗ particular item and then could

12:02 ↗ potentially at the last minute be put in

12:04 ↗ a situation where they were expected to

12:06 ↗ vote that could create an awkward

12:08 ↗ situation. So I think and you know these

12:11 ↗ are recommendations and this that was

12:12 ↗ the conclusion of my presentation. Those

12:14 ↗ are the three recommendations I have

12:16 ↗ tonight. There are certainly multiple

12:18 ↗ ways to approach your rules, leaving

12:20 ↗ them as is, um, putting some other

12:22 ↗ language in there. Uh, so you could

12:24 ↗ choose to approve these tonight. You

12:25 ↗ could choose to approve one or two of

12:27 ↗ the three, none of the three. Um, I'm

12:30 ↗ open to any questions the other

12:32 ↗ commissioners might have.

12:35 ↗ Okay, great. Thank you, Tisha. And I do

12:37 ↗ want to remind the commissioners, please

12:39 ↗ let me call on you. Um, because there is

12:41 ↗ a process and an order to this. So, the

12:43 ↗ first thing we have to do is actually

12:44 ↗ make a motion before we can even debate

12:46 ↗ or ask questions. So, we want to make

12:48 ↗ sure we're doing the process

12:50 ↗ correctly because there's amendments.

12:52 ↗ Um, would someone like to make a motion

12:54 ↗ to open discussion for these amendments

12:56 ↗ as far as our rules and regulations?

13:01 ↗ Commissioner, I move to open discussion.

13:05 ↗ Uh, do we need it to be more formal than

13:06 ↗ that? Okay. Looking for staff for help

13:09 ↗ there. Phone a friend. Um, all right. is

13:12 ↗ do we need a second?

13:14 ↗ Um, chair, before the before you vote on

13:16 ↗ these, you would want a more formal

13:18 ↗ motion, but I don't see a problem with

13:20 ↗ asking questions at this point and

13:21 ↗ having some initial discussion if you'd

13:23 ↗ like before formally moving the and the

13:26 ↗ wording for the proposed motion is in

13:27 ↗ the staff memo that was included. Okay.

13:31 ↗ Our staff is fantastic. It's why we keep

13:33 ↗ them around.

13:34 ↗ Um, all right. So, let's open it up for

13:36 ↗ discussion and questions. Does anyone

13:39 ↗ have Yes, Commissioner Matthews. I'd

13:41 ↗ like to go back to I'm sorry I forgot

13:43 ↗ your last name. Helen's uh

13:46 ↗ okay um on her question. I'm not sure if

13:49 ↗ it was answered but what does happen if

13:51 ↗ there is a tie in the

13:53 ↗ voting? That's a great great question. A

13:56 ↗ mo a motion fails. So there needs to be

13:58 ↗ a majority of members voting and present

14:02 ↗ in voting to pass a measure unless

14:04 ↗ there's some other rule in place. I'm

14:06 ↗ not aware of any other rules for the

14:08 ↗ planning commission except actually

14:10 ↗ amending your rules. It says it requires

14:13 ↗ a majority of the full membership. So

14:15 ↗ four members present. But for all your

14:17 ↗ other recommendations to the city

14:19 ↗ council, it would be that majority

14:22 ↗ needed. So if here's a follow-up

14:24 ↗ question. If it fails, does it come back

14:27 ↗ up in the next meeting or does someone

14:28 ↗ have to propose that it be added back

14:31 ↗ into the agenda?

14:34 ↗ We're we're getting um into

14:35 ↗ parliamentary procedure 2011 here. No,

14:38 ↗ that's okay. I love talking about

14:40 ↗ parliamentary procedure. Um I mean there

14:42 ↗ are a couple mechanisms. So one of the

14:44 ↗ things at the meeting there's actually a

14:45 ↗ tool you can use where you reconsider

14:47 ↗ the vote which brings it back before if

14:49 ↗ that passes brings the same vote back

14:51 ↗ before the group and people can choose

14:53 ↗ to vote differently. Um another thing

14:55 ↗ would be it could be renewed at a

14:57 ↗ subsequent meeting.

15:01 ↗ Thank you Commissioner Matthews.

15:04 ↗ Anyone else have any questions um

15:07 ↗ regarding the three amendments that

15:09 ↗ Tisha has

15:14 ↗ proposed? And I'm also just uh so you

15:17 ↗ know I am looking also at Commissioner

15:19 ↗ Adair and there is a yellow hand icon in

15:24 ↗ case you do want to make comments. So I

15:25 ↗ am also I I've got my vice chair here to

15:27 ↗ keep me honest. So we're not going to

15:30 ↗ miss you.

15:31 ↗ These all seem pretty standard to me.

15:33 ↗ This chair voice um it seems like good

15:36 ↗ housekeeping best practices. I'm not too

15:37 ↗ worried about abstensions. They don't

15:39 ↗ happen often. When people do their

15:40 ↗ homework, they usually are going to go

15:41 ↗ one way or the other. If it becomes a

15:43 ↗ problem, it is something we can address

15:45 ↗ next year. So, I think we're going to be

15:49 ↗ okay. Any other discussion?

15:52 ↗ I

15:54 ↗ can't. You can see that I'm asking.

15:57 ↗ Maybe somebody can show you later. You

15:59 ↗ can just do one of these. use my real

16:00 ↗ hand. Okay. Um, so there may be some

16:04 ↗ matters before this commission where I

16:06 ↗ will need to abstain. I still need to

16:09 ↗ find out from the city attorney if that

16:10 ↗ is the case and it would not be a matter

16:13 ↗ of not having an opinion. It may be a

16:15 ↗ matter of personal interest. Well, at

16:17 ↗ the moment you're an alternate. Remember

16:18 ↗ that. So, but if you are a regular

16:21 ↗ member that night, then that would be

16:22 ↗ obviously something you'd need to

16:24 ↗ consider. Okay.

16:29 ↗ Is there any other discussion around

16:30 ↗ these three

16:33 ↗ amendments? Okay. Now, we need some

16:35 ↗ formality.

16:36 ↗ Correct. Would somebody like to read the

16:40 ↗ motion on the floor? And we'll get a

16:42 ↗ second and a

16:45 ↗ vote. Uh, Commissioner Zacharov,

16:49 ↗ I move to adopt the rules and

16:51 ↗ regulations with the proposed amendments

16:53 ↗ as presented tonight. Is there a second?

16:58 ↗ All in favor, please say I. I. I. All

17:02 ↗ right, that's unanimous. Those rules and

17:05 ↗ rags uh amendments have passed. So,

17:07 ↗ thank you, Tisha. Appreciate it. Always

17:10 ↗ fantastic presentations. I saw the last

17:12 ↗ one uh last Thursday, and I know they

17:14 ↗ are always exciting. So, they don't ever

17:16 ↗ think we ever get tired of hearing them.

17:18 ↗ Um

17:21 ↗ yeah, right. Planning 301, parliamentary

17:24 ↗ rules 301. Okay, we are going to move on

17:28 ↗ and this is actually planning 101. So

17:30 ↗ that's apt. Uh and tonight our principal

17:35 ↗ planner Kristen Leon is going to be

17:37 ↗ presenting. So Kristen, when you are

17:39 ↗ ready, please take it away.

18:07 ↗ All right, good evening. My name is

18:09 ↗ Kristen Lee and I'm a principal planner

18:10 ↗ with the community planning and

18:12 ↗ development department. And we are we're

18:14 ↗ going to talk about planning

18:16 ↗ 101.

18:17 ↗ So, let me make this bigger for

18:22 ↗ you. There we

18:24 ↗ go. You know, just some there are basics

18:28 ↗ in learning. There's so many different

18:30 ↗ levels of governments and jurisdictions

18:32 ↗ to what we do. So, it's important that

18:35 ↗ you all understand how it works and

18:37 ↗ where we're coming from and where it

18:38 ↗ goes after it leaves you. So, we just

18:40 ↗ wanted to introduce some of that to you

18:42 ↗ all tonight. For a lot of you, this is

18:43 ↗ new. For some of this is a refresher.

18:46 ↗ So, planning it does it shapes land use.

18:48 ↗ It shapes infrastructure. It shapes

18:50 ↗ develop community development and

18:51 ↗ transportation. it. We do our very best

18:54 ↗ to maximize health and safety safety of

18:56 ↗ all those who live and work here. We

19:00 ↗ particularly the planning policy

19:02 ↗ commission take a very broad view and

19:04 ↗ say what do we want the city to look

19:06 ↗ like as a whole and how are these things

19:08 ↗ going to work together and how are we

19:10 ↗ going to get there and it ensures that

19:12 ↗ we have choices when it comes to

19:14 ↗ transportation and types of houses that

19:16 ↗ they want to live in and where they want

19:17 ↗ to live. So it's it's it's big. It forms

19:20 ↗ the way we

19:22 ↗ live. So the state of Washington has the

19:26 ↗ growth management act that was adopted

19:27 ↗ back in

19:28 ↗ 1990 and it is concerned with 13

19:32 ↗ different topics a lot. So environmental

19:35 ↗ protection, historic preservation,

19:37 ↗ community or public participation,

19:39 ↗ ongoing public participation, affordable

19:41 ↗ housing, um concentrated urban growth,

19:44 ↗ so preventing sprawl, natural resources,

19:47 ↗ transportation, it covers the

19:50 ↗ gamut, but that's sort of what guides us

19:53 ↗ in every agency and what they

19:56 ↗ do. So big picture, you start with the

19:59 ↗ state legislature, right? They had their

20:01 ↗ legislative session every year and they

20:03 ↗ proposed new legislation that has become

20:07 ↗ more and more related to planning and

20:09 ↗ what we do uh than it has in the past.

20:12 ↗ Then you have the Department of

20:14 ↗ Commerce. Then you narrow it down a

20:16 ↗ little bit to Puet Sound Regional

20:17 ↗ Council, often most often referred to as

20:20 ↗ PSRC, Puget Sound Regional Council. Then

20:24 ↗ King County and then Little Olysqua.

20:27 ↗ Okay. So legislature, like I said, they

20:31 ↗ establish and enact bills. And back in

20:35 ↗ 2021, they enacted House Bill

20:39 ↗ 1220. And

20:41 ↗ it it was a huge umbrella for what was

20:43 ↗ to come next. It talked about different

20:46 ↗ types of affordable housing, emergency

20:48 ↗ housing, emergency shelters,

20:50 ↗ transitional housing,

20:52 ↗ um coming up with regulations to prevent

20:55 ↗ or mitigate displacement of people,

21:00 ↗ um uh diversity, accessory dwelling

21:02 ↗ units, just covered everything. And from

21:04 ↗ that point on, what now this is my

21:06 ↗ opinion, but I think this is what

21:08 ↗ happened.

21:09 ↗ Um people have taken bits of this, the

21:12 ↗ legislature has and now we have

21:15 ↗ um we

21:17 ↗ have House Bill 1337 which you all just

21:20 ↗ um acted on regarding additional or

21:23 ↗ accessory dwelling units 1110 which

21:25 ↗ regarding middle housing. Uh we talked

21:28 ↗ briefly a while ago about co-l

21:29 ↗ livingiving house bill 1998 52 5240

21:33 ↗ which controls our timelines and when

21:35 ↗ those you know when things have to be

21:37 ↗ done. There are already things in place

21:38 ↗ but those have been sped up quite a bit.

21:40 ↗ On the right is a list of and some of

21:42 ↗ these are duplicates yes but are a list

21:44 ↗ of real bills that are coming through

21:45 ↗ now. The legislature just finished um so

21:47 ↗ we'll be busy next year. I'm not sure

21:49 ↗ which of these all passed but you'll

21:51 ↗ find out soon enough.

21:54 ↗ So then you have the department of

21:56 ↗ commerce part of the state. They provide

21:59 ↗ guidance to the cities when we are

22:00 ↗ writing our ordinances. If we have

22:02 ↗ questions they help us out. We uh

22:06 ↗ particularly with middle housing had

22:08 ↗ numerous discussions with the department

22:09 ↗ of commerce. They then later on ensured

22:12 ↗ that what we are proposing and what we

22:15 ↗ adopted is consistent and complies with

22:18 ↗ the state law with our um RCWs. then a

22:21 ↗ revised um code of Washington. They also

22:24 ↗ provide grants. So the state enacts all

22:27 ↗ these laws and we need people to help us

22:29 ↗ do it. So they provide grants for

22:30 ↗ consultants or for extra staffing in

22:33 ↗ order to get these things

22:34 ↗ done. Hi

22:37 ↗ Tim Pu Sound Regional Council PSRC they

22:41 ↗ have jurisdiction over four counties.

22:44 ↗ They have jurisdiction over Kitnap

22:46 ↗ Kitaps, Snomish, Pierce and King

22:48 ↗ counties. They also have their own

22:51 ↗ comprehensive plan which is now vision

22:53 ↗ 2050 and we need to comply with their

22:56 ↗ comprehensive plan. They certify our

22:59 ↗ comprehensive plans every 10 years. So

23:01 ↗ the big overhaul that we just did that

23:03 ↗ has to be certified by the Puget Sound

23:05 ↗ Regional Council before it can it's

23:07 ↗ fully in place. They provide us grants

23:10 ↗ as well primarily uh for infrastructure

23:13 ↗ but for some other things that come out.

23:15 ↗ And then they also approve and monitor

23:17 ↗ regional growth centers. Now, I don't

23:19 ↗ know if a lot of you knew this, but we

23:20 ↗ have a regional growth center. It's in

23:22 ↗ purple here. It goes from west of SR900

23:26 ↗ up to Southeast 56th, east to Pickering

23:29 ↗ Barn down to 7th and then back over to

23:32 ↗ past SR900. This is where we want all of

23:36 ↗ our or the most of our growth. This is

23:38 ↗ where we want our densest growth to

23:39 ↗ occur in the next by 2044.

23:42 ↗ So several years ago, I you I think

23:44 ↗ Stephen told you all this, we adopted

23:46 ↗ the central Isiqua plan and central

23:48 ↗ Isiqua standards um which would help

23:51 ↗ hopefully allow for and guide denser

23:54 ↗ developments in this

23:55 ↗ area. Being a regional growth center

23:59 ↗ um if we apply for grants, we have an

24:02 ↗ advantage. We don't that doesn't

24:04 ↗ necessar it doesn't guarantee us grant

24:07 ↗ funding but it gives us a little heads

24:10 ↗ up in in uh applying for

24:16 ↗ applications. Next we have King County.

24:18 ↗ Yes, they too have their own

24:20 ↗ comprehensive plan which we must abide

24:21 ↗ by. So we do that. King Countywide

24:24 ↗ planning policies or the CPPs, that's

24:27 ↗ how they're often referred. We have our

24:30 ↗ they provide the urban growth capacity

24:33 ↗ report which again every 8 to 10 years

24:37 ↗ the city's jurisdictions are required to

24:40 ↗ accept growth targets. We have we accept

24:43 ↗ housing targets and we accept uh job

24:46 ↗ targets and we come up with how much

24:49 ↗ capacity we have in our city for both

24:51 ↗ jobs and housing. takes us about a year

24:54 ↗ and a half to do this and then we go

24:55 ↗ through another year and a half of

24:57 ↗ negotiations with all of the other

24:58 ↗ jurisdictions within King County to

25:00 ↗ decide who gets what. I think I've

25:02 ↗ mentioned this before, but for 2044, our

25:05 ↗ targets for housing are 3500 units and

25:08 ↗ for jobs at 7,950 units. That's the new

25:12 ↗ units that we need to

25:15 ↗ achieve. They also have Metro. You know

25:18 ↗ about Metro? We work a lot, our

25:20 ↗ transportation planner, Jason, works a

25:22 ↗ lot with

25:25 ↗ Metro. So, this is a rundown of how

25:28 ↗ things work in the city. We have our

25:30 ↗ comprehensive plan, which is the

25:32 ↗ overarching vision. It has visions,

25:34 ↗ goals, and policies. You all have seen

25:35 ↗ that. From those, we have functional

25:38 ↗ plans like our parks and recreation

25:40 ↗ plan, our storm water plan, our mobility

25:43 ↗ action plan. Those all are five-year

25:47 ↗ guidelines of what we need to get done

25:49 ↗ to implement the comp comprehensive plan

25:51 ↗ in the next five years. From that we

25:53 ↗ have our citywide strategic plan that

25:55 ↗ also looks at the next five years but

25:57 ↗ says what actions are we going to take

25:59 ↗ from these functional plans to make this

26:00 ↗ happen and then that goes to the budget

26:04 ↗ and council says we need to get all

26:06 ↗ these things done. Some of them are on

26:07 ↗ the capital improvement plan. We need to

26:10 ↗ fund it all. That's how that comes

26:12 ↗ about. And then we have and the land use

26:14 ↗ code helps to implement all of this as

26:16 ↗ well. And then we have our performance

26:17 ↗ metrics. So at the end of every year,

26:20 ↗ it's on our website. We have our

26:21 ↗ performance metrics page and you can

26:22 ↗ look at see how we're doing. Here's our

26:24 ↗ goal. Here's what we've done. And it

26:26 ↗ goes all the way back to the comp plan.

26:28 ↗ What's not working and what do we need

26:30 ↗ to fix? So it comes full circle every

26:36 ↗ year. Then it comes to you. You all are

26:39 ↗ actually a group that is required by the

26:41 ↗ state and so thank you for volunteering

26:44 ↗ to do this. You are responsible for the

26:48 ↗ maintenance of the comprehensive plan,

26:50 ↗ all of the neighborhood plans which are

26:52 ↗ part of the comprehensive plan. Right

26:54 ↗ now we have central Isiqua and we have

26:57 ↗ Oldtown, but in the very near future we

26:59 ↗ plan on doing several more. You're also

27:02 ↗ responsible for anything in title 18,

27:04 ↗ which are the land use code amendments.

27:06 ↗ So all of those you all review and make

27:08 ↗ recommendations to our city

27:11 ↗ council. So here's this is my last

27:14 ↗ slide. So here's how it goes. So state

27:16 ↗ legislation sets and sets an agenda of

27:19 ↗ things that we need to do through bills

27:22 ↗ that they've enacted as well as council

27:24 ↗ has priorities that we need to look at

27:26 ↗ and administrative priorities that we

27:28 ↗ need to carry out. So we filter through

27:30 ↗ those and we come up with our work

27:32 ↗ plan. Excuse me. Some of those go

27:35 ↗ through PPC, some do

27:37 ↗ not. You all review what is supposed to

27:40 ↗ come through

27:41 ↗ you. We notify Congress and we say,

27:43 ↗ "This is what we're proposing." Every

27:45 ↗ time we have a proposed amendment coming

27:47 ↗ through, we notify commerce and say,

27:48 ↗ "This is what we're proposing." And if

27:50 ↗ they have comments, they will send them

27:51 ↗ back to us or again, we meet with them.

27:54 ↗ Then you all hold a public hearing and

27:56 ↗ you re make a recommendation to city

27:58 ↗ council. That recommendation actually

28:00 ↗ goes to a council committee which is

28:02 ↗ typically the planning, development and

28:03 ↗ environment committee. We work with them

28:06 ↗ for one two meetings. They make a

28:09 ↗ recommendation to the full city council

28:11 ↗ who then takes action and then we send

28:14 ↗ that to commerce for final approval to

28:17 ↗ show them that we

28:18 ↗ comply. So that's the process and I

28:22 ↗ should have told you in the middle ask

28:23 ↗ stop me and ask me anything anywhere but

28:25 ↗ um I am open to questions now. Yeah. I

28:27 ↗ know. I think we want to uh definitely

28:29 ↗ ask a few questions, I would imagine. Um

28:31 ↗ I'm thinking of that what is that that

28:33 ↗ schoolhouse rock? I'm a bill. I'm a bill

28:35 ↗ on Capitol Hill. So yeah, the long

28:38 ↗ strange process, right? Um but yeah,

28:41 ↗ we've got some time and I definitely

28:43 ↗ this is a lot for anybody even for

28:46 ↗ someone like who's seen this multiple

28:48 ↗ times. So let's open it up for questions

28:51 ↗ and um we could probably spend 10

28:53 ↗ minutes on this at least. So again, if

28:56 ↗ anyone has questions, please just let me

28:57 ↗ know. Commissioner Mole.

29:03 ↗ Yep. You want a microphone? You You had

29:05 ↗ said that the city is considering other

29:07 ↗ developing other districts. What would

29:09 ↗ those other districts perhaps be?

29:12 ↗ They're not We're not interested in

29:14 ↗ developing other districts. We're

29:15 ↗ interested in developing plans,

29:18 ↗ neighborhood plans for the existing

29:19 ↗ neighborhoods that we have. So, in our

29:21 ↗ most recent comprehensive plan, we

29:23 ↗ updated our neighborhoods, but we have

29:24 ↗ Oldtown, we have central Isiqua, we have

29:27 ↗ Isiqua Valley, we have Talis, Isiqua

29:29 ↗ Highlands, uh, North Isiqua, there

29:32 ↗ there, I think, 13 different

29:34 ↗ neighborhoods that we have and only two

29:35 ↗ have plans. Two are planned

29:37 ↗ neighborhoods already. Um, but then only

29:39 ↗ two of those have two outside of those

29:41 ↗ have plans. So, we have about nine

29:43 ↗ different areas where we want to work

29:45 ↗ with the neighborhoods and say, "What

29:47 ↗ what do you want this to look like?"

29:49 ↗ Thank you. You're welcome,

29:53 ↗ Commissioner Matthews. Yeah, sorry. This

29:55 ↗ is probably because you haven't worked

29:56 ↗ on these plans yet, but I know like

29:58 ↗ Montro and Talis have HOAs. So, out of

30:02 ↗ curiosity, what kind of overlays, you

30:05 ↗ touched a little bit on this on the last

30:06 ↗ meeting. How does the your neighborhood

30:09 ↗ plan work with those HOAs? Does it like

30:12 ↗ they go away and don't take priority if

30:14 ↗ they do some major developments or how

30:18 ↗ does that work really? So, we've sort of

30:21 ↗ started we've started to come up with

30:23 ↗ criteria, but we haven't worked them

30:24 ↗ through the administration yet. But

30:26 ↗ those communities with HOAs, yes, they

30:28 ↗ they know what they want their housing

30:30 ↗ to look like and they know what they

30:31 ↗ want their landscaping to look like, but

30:33 ↗ is there maybe some transportation route

30:36 ↗ or is there some public art that they

30:39 ↗ really really want to get and we can

30:40 ↗ find a way to help them? Is there

30:42 ↗ something else in their neighborhood

30:43 ↗ that they're HOAs don't control that the

30:45 ↗ city can help with? Maybe there's a

30:47 ↗ toolbox. So you have a neighborhood that

30:50 ↗ needs, you know, it I used to work in

30:53 ↗ Houston and we had toolboxes for

30:54 ↗ neighborhoods and they could come and

30:55 ↗ borrow tools and go do maintenance on

30:57 ↗ their houses, that kind of thing that we

30:58 ↗ used to work with. So that kind of

31:01 ↗ thing. Thank you. But you're right. When

31:03 ↗ it comes to Talis and Isqua Highlands,

31:05 ↗ those are planned neighborhoods and at

31:07 ↗ this time don't need to be there. They

31:09 ↗ would not rise to the top of the

31:10 ↗ priority list.

31:21 ↗ I think Kristen got off

31:24 ↗ light. Uh, any other questions for

31:26 ↗ Kristen on this

31:28 ↗ topic? It's a lot to digest. I mean,

31:31 ↗ it's it's a it's it's a pretty unique

31:33 ↗ process, but obviously staff's here to

31:35 ↗ help. If anyone uh wants to find out

31:37 ↗ more information about the process, um,

31:40 ↗ I know Stephen I know Kristen would be

31:41 ↗ happy to help. So, again, feel free to

31:43 ↗ reach out. And I do see another hand.

31:45 ↗ Commissioner

32:02 ↗ Adair. She's trying to talk.

32:09 ↗ Commissioner Dear, are you muted? We

32:11 ↗ can't hear you.

32:19 ↗ We can't hear you.

32:23 ↗ You could type it into the chat.

32:34 ↗ No.

32:37 ↗ Yes. Oh, there we go.

32:39 ↗ Yes.

32:43 ↗ Do you have a Do you have a

32:44 ↗ question? Commissioner Dair, do you have

32:46 ↗ a question?

32:49 ↗ One second.

33:01 ↗ Yes, I'm typing it in. Oh, we could hear

33:04 ↗ you now. We can hear

33:06 ↗ you. So, you can just speak.

33:11 ↗ Oh,

33:14 ↗ so she did put it in chat and I'll just

33:16 ↗ um repeat it out. I heard Oh, wait. You

33:18 ↗ can hear me now. Okay, great. Sorry. So

33:20 ↗ So I heard a mention of the

33:22 ↗ environmental committee, but I don't see

33:24 ↗ where it is on the slide or did I mishar

33:27 ↗ that or where does that come? So the the

33:30 ↗ environmental board is just a it's a

33:31 ↗ separate board from us. They're not

33:35 ↗ involved in our process. If we have

33:36 ↗ things that need to go to if there is

33:40 ↗ anything have involving parks, anything

33:42 ↗ involving economic vitality, anything

33:43 ↗ involving the environment such as the

33:45 ↗ tree code which is about to come to you

33:47 ↗ all, then we will take those to those

33:49 ↗ other boards and commissions first and

33:51 ↗ get their feedback before we bring it

33:53 ↗ back to planning policy commission.

33:54 ↗ That's how they fall in.

33:58 ↗ Okay. Well, thank you, Commissioner

34:00 ↗ Dare. I know there's some some technical

34:02 ↗ problems. Um but uh thankfully we record

34:06 ↗ all this. Commissioner Matthews, I'm

34:09 ↗ glad you asked that question because I

34:10 ↗ did have I did see someone sent in um a

34:14 ↗ letter to the environmental committee.

34:16 ↗ So then I started going down the rabbit

34:17 ↗ hole. So I wondered how do so they over

34:21 ↗ they view those items before they come

34:23 ↗ to us and kind of work through some of

34:25 ↗ the issues first. Is that how it goes?

34:27 ↗ They often do.

34:28 ↗ So planning policy commission's primary

34:31 ↗ purviews are over housing and land use

34:35 ↗ and the land use

34:37 ↗ code and there are other boards and

34:40 ↗ commissions that cover things such as

34:42 ↗ parks and the environment and

34:45 ↗ transportation. So those boards and

34:48 ↗ commissions are advisory boards. So they

34:51 ↗ make recommendation make recommendations

34:53 ↗ or comments to the planning policy

34:55 ↗ commission. Planning Policy Commission

34:57 ↗ then makes the final recommendation

35:00 ↗ to the city council. If it's part of the

35:03 ↗ comprehensive plan or land use code, if

35:05 ↗ it's not part of those, then this

35:07 ↗ commission has nothing to do with

35:10 ↗ it. You're welcome.

35:14 ↗ All right. Well, thank you, Commissioner

35:15 ↗ Adair, and thank you, Commissioner

35:17 ↗ Matthews, and everybody, Commissioner

35:18 ↗ Mole, for your questions. Um, and I also

35:22 ↗ do want to say thank you to our unsung

35:24 ↗ heroes this evening, Tim and Chance. You

35:26 ↗ guys are doing great. Uh, my mic gave

35:29 ↗ out, so I'm now I'm borrowing Jesse's as

35:31 ↗ well. So, it's just one of those

35:33 ↗ evenings. Um, but I if that's it, we're

35:36 ↗ going to move on to our last order of

35:38 ↗ business this

35:39 ↗ evening. Okay. And I believe Kristen is

35:42 ↗ also presenting this, but this part of

35:45 ↗ our evening is going to be a discussion

35:48 ↗ around the additional tit title 18

35:51 ↗ policy amendments. Uh Kristen's going to

35:53 ↗ walk us through these as our final item.

35:56 ↗ So Kristen, one more time.

36:05 ↗ So yes, we continue with amendments

36:07 ↗ tonight and we will be back I believe

36:10 ↗ next week or the week after that with

36:12 ↗ amendments as well. And then the public

36:15 ↗ hearing is at the end of May for all of

36:18 ↗ the policy amendments that we were

36:19 ↗ doing. As with the last amendments we

36:21 ↗ brought to you at the last meeting,

36:24 ↗ there's not a lot of policy discussion

36:25 ↗ to be had with these. They are more

36:27 ↗ minor amendments, but we still want to

36:29 ↗ preview these with you before you have

36:30 ↗ to ever make a decision on

36:34 ↗ them. So again, for you all and for the

36:37 ↗ public, we did a land use code overhaul

36:40 ↗ in 2023 and we continue to review to

36:43 ↗ make sure to that it's good, that it's

36:46 ↗ right,

36:47 ↗ that there aren't mistakes. And when you

36:50 ↗ have this many people working together

36:52 ↗ to totally overhaul a 450 page document,

36:56 ↗ there are bound to be mistakes and we

36:57 ↗ have found them or things that could be

36:59 ↗ better. So, we're working on it. So,

37:01 ↗ tonight we're talking about more policy

37:04 ↗ amendments. So, again, just like last

37:06 ↗ time, are the proposed changes clear or

37:09 ↗ are there additional changes needed for

37:12 ↗ clarity? The first one that we have, we

37:14 ↗ have several levels of review, one

37:17 ↗ through five. Four goes to the

37:19 ↗ development commission. Five comes

37:22 ↗ to the planning policy commission for

37:25 ↗ recommendation to city

37:27 ↗ council. Most of what we do is

37:29 ↗ legislative. So it is not sight

37:32 ↗ sightspecific. You know quasi judicial

37:34 ↗ sight specific legislative which is more

37:36 ↗ citywide. That is what we do. There is a

37:38 ↗ requirement right now that we provide a

37:40 ↗ notice of application to the public.

37:43 ↗ Well, since most of

37:45 ↗ our initiatives are initiated by the

37:48 ↗ city, not quite sure who, you know, who

37:50 ↗ we would notify. So, we're trying to

37:52 ↗ exempt that from this requirement. The

37:54 ↗ other one is that there's a comment

37:56 ↗ period on applications sub submitted, a

37:58 ↗ 14-day comment period because usually

38:00 ↗ when you do something, an application is

38:02 ↗ submitted on or posted on the site.

38:04 ↗ You've seen the big white signs. We

38:06 ↗ don't have a place to propose to post a

38:08 ↗ sign for things all over the city. So,

38:10 ↗ we are hoping to become exempt from that

38:12 ↗ as well. And the last one is notice of

38:14 ↗ decision. We post it on our website that

38:17 ↗ it's been completed. We send it to

38:18 ↗ commerce if we need to. Um, but as far

38:21 ↗ as sending it out to parties of

38:23 ↗ interest, which is where the notice of

38:24 ↗ decision usually goes. That again is

38:26 ↗ something that we feel the city should

38:28 ↗ be exempt from doing just for legisl

38:30 ↗ legislative items only, not for the site

38:33 ↗ specific building a new building,

38:35 ↗ building a new park. These are

38:39 ↗ different. You will see more added to

38:42 ↗ this when it comes to comes through for

38:43 ↗ the public hearing. Last in our old

38:46 ↗ code, banquet meeting and reception

38:49 ↗ halls were allowed in mixed use and

38:51 ↗ mixed use central Isiqua. They were

38:53 ↗ inadvertently left out of this code.

38:55 ↗ They will be added back in. We have a

38:57 ↗ similar situation with dry cleaners and

39:01 ↗ pressing pressing stations. and one

39:05 ↗ other one came up. So, we were we are

39:07 ↗ actually now going to sit go through and

39:09 ↗ go through the entire all four of the

39:12 ↗ old codes and the new one one last time

39:14 ↗ to make sure that we've gotten them all.

39:15 ↗ But for now, this is the one

39:17 ↗ tonight. The last one is another House

39:20 ↗ bill. This

39:22 ↗ is it essentially lists all the things

39:24 ↗ that we can't do in order to allow for

39:27 ↗ residential uses to move into commercial

39:29 ↗ and mixeduse buildings that exist. And

39:33 ↗ this is this all applies to buildings

39:35 ↗ that do not change or expand. They can

39:38 ↗ change say the facade or the windows

39:40 ↗ that kind of thing but they cannot

39:41 ↗ expand the building. So this is all

39:44 ↗ allowing for residential within the

39:46 ↗ existing

39:48 ↗ footprint. So things that we may not do

39:51 ↗ are impose density restrictions that

39:53 ↗ prevent the addition of an 50% more

39:57 ↗ density than that underlying zone would

39:59 ↗ typically allow. We are not allowed to

40:02 ↗ impose parking, architectural, or

40:04 ↗ permitting requirements beyond what

40:06 ↗ currently exists. We are not allowed to

40:08 ↗ prohibit units within any part of a

40:10 ↗ building except on the ground floor

40:12 ↗ where commercial and is required. That

40:15 ↗ would be along parts of Front Street and

40:18 ↗ parts of central Isiqua.

40:22 ↗ We are not allowed to deny a permit for

40:24 ↗ the addition of units within an existing

40:25 ↗ non-conforming building due to

40:28 ↗ nonconformities such as say maybe they

40:30 ↗ don't have enough parking for the

40:31 ↗ existing use or they don't have the

40:33 ↗ setbacks that we would typically

40:35 ↗ require. Usually we would say no you

40:37 ↗ can't do that. In this case we can't say

40:39 ↗ that and we cannot require a concurrency

40:41 ↗ report for buildings that were permitted

40:44 ↗ three or more years prior to. So the

40:46 ↗ items that you see in green were items

40:48 ↗ that we need to address. the items in

40:49 ↗ black are already in our code and don't

40:51 ↗ need to be

40:52 ↗ addressed. So the first one is the 50%.

40:56 ↗ This is really interesting.

40:58 ↗ Um so pretend we have a zone say that

41:02 ↗ allows for a maximum of 10 units per

41:05 ↗ acre and in that zone there is a

41:08 ↗ commercial use building. Instead of only

41:11 ↗ allowing 10 residential units per acre,

41:14 ↗ we have to allow 15 per acre. So that's

41:18 ↗ what the state's telling us and that's

41:19 ↗ what this amendment would

41:23 ↗ do. Parking exemptions,

41:27 ↗ we cannot require them to increase the

41:30 ↗ amount of parking that is there. Even if

41:33 ↗ there are 100 residents and only 50

41:36 ↗ parking spaces, we

41:38 ↗ cannot require them to increase the

41:40 ↗ number of parking spaces.

41:43 ↗ What we can do is require them to keep

41:45 ↗ the existing parking spaces that are

41:47 ↗ there if they meet the commercial use

41:49 ↗ that was already

41:56 ↗ there. This isn't parking exemptions.

41:59 ↗ This is concurrency. I had the wrong

42:00 ↗ title. I apologize.

42:04 ↗ Um, this is anyway uh this is

42:07 ↗ concurrency. We cannot require

42:09 ↗ concurrency report for a project that

42:12 ↗ was

42:13 ↗ permitted three or more years ago. So

42:16 ↗ concurrency is what keeps our

42:19 ↗ infrastructure, our roads from

42:22 ↗ being totally overcrowded with the with

42:25 ↗ three exceptions, I believe, maybe four.

42:27 ↗ There are a few places where we can do

42:28 ↗ it.

42:31 ↗ But typically when people come in they

42:34 ↗ have to tell us how many units or how

42:35 ↗ many trips their development is going to

42:37 ↗ produce if it produces a certain number

42:40 ↗ of unit trips and I think that's 30 they

42:42 ↗ are pro they are required to provide us

42:44 ↗ with a concurrency or a traffic study

42:47 ↗ and from that we determine what their

42:49 ↗ mitigation are going to be for the

42:52 ↗ traffic they are going to produce but in

42:54 ↗ this case we are not allowed to do it.

42:55 ↗ They can tell us how many trips they're

42:57 ↗ going to provide or they're going to c

42:59 ↗ they are going to make. My words are

43:03 ↗ gone. I apologize.

43:05 ↗ But they we cannot require them to do

43:08 ↗ the additional work after that even if

43:10 ↗ it's over

43:13 ↗ 30. Got my titles wrong. The last one is

43:26 ↗ I got my titles mixed up. So now I'm all

43:28 ↗ confused. But um

43:34 ↗ we Okay, I feel horrible. This happened

43:37 ↗ right before I came here and I

43:44 ↗ apologize.

43:48 ↗ Concurrency I believe this is Oh, this

43:51 ↗ is parking.

43:52 ↗ exemptions. They are I'll have to look

43:54 ↗ at this one and I really I apologize. Um

43:57 ↗ they are exempt. They have an exemption

44:00 ↗ in parking and I apologize off the top

44:03 ↗ of my head. These are mixed up and I

44:05 ↗ tried to do something fancy right before

44:07 ↗ we came to the meeting and that's my

44:08 ↗ lesson learned. So um but I will get

44:11 ↗ back to you on that one.

44:13 ↗ So, like I said, you're going to see

44:15 ↗ these again on well on

44:18 ↗ April on April, the second meeting in

44:21 ↗ April and the first meeting in May.

44:23 ↗ We'll come back for a public hearing.

44:24 ↗ These dates are wrong. We'll come back

44:25 ↗ for a public hearing at the end of May,

44:27 ↗ then to PL planning and development uh

44:29 ↗ PTE planning development environment

44:31 ↗ committee and then to council uh in

44:36 ↗ June. I apologize. And are there any

44:39 ↗ thoughts on the proposed changes?

44:41 ↗ Thank you, Kristen. Um, yeah, that

44:44 ↗ that's a lot. Yeah, please. Commissioner

44:46 ↗ Crass. Hi, Kristen. Um, Commissioner

44:49 ↗ Crass, is just to help some context, are

44:52 ↗ there any examples of what's been done

44:55 ↗ in the past of this conversion of

44:57 ↗ commercial to multifamily or anything

44:59 ↗ that's in the pipeline that's in the

45:01 ↗ city? So, you can say, oh, this building

45:02 ↗ over here is doing just I'm trying to

45:05 ↗ wrap my head around what this would be

45:07 ↗ like. Do you take the like the Lazy Boy

45:09 ↗ furniture store? Is that an example?

45:11 ↗ That would that would be an example. And

45:13 ↗ we No one shops there. Um and they have

45:16 ↗ a big parking lot. The um I'm just

45:17 ↗ curious if there's anything in the

45:19 ↗ pipeline that's actually there's

45:20 ↗ something in the pipeline, but it's not

45:22 ↗ been applied for yet. So, okay. So, it's

45:23 ↗ not on the development site list.

45:26 ↗ Correct. It would not be there yet. When

45:28 ↗ because that helps

45:29 ↗ dimensionalize what we're talking about.

45:31 ↗ Like is this like a commercial one

45:33 ↗ that's going to four units or is this

45:36 ↗ something like a big box store that can

45:38 ↗ go to a 100 units? It could be anything.

45:40 ↗ It could be something on Sunset that is

45:42 ↗ c currently a commercial building that

45:44 ↗ was be going to be converted uh

45:46 ↗ converted to residential. It could be an

45:48 ↗ office building. You've got, you know,

45:49 ↗ 12th and Maple office building that

45:51 ↗ could be

45:52 ↗ converted. Yeah. There all different

45:56 ↗ sizes. Yeah.

45:59 ↗ Yeah. Please. I assume we're not the

46:01 ↗ only um municipality or wherever is

46:04 ↗ dealing with this. Is there an examples

46:05 ↗ like that you've seen that's where it's

46:06 ↗ been done in Redmond or Belleview. I'm

46:08 ↗ just trying to wrap my head around what

46:09 ↗ these Not yet, but I know that the city

46:12 ↗ of Seattle has is trying to do that

46:14 ↗ right now with a lot of their vacant

46:16 ↗ office buildings. So, when if you ask if

46:18 ↗ it can be big office buildings, yes, it

46:19 ↗ can. Yeah. I'll see if I can find some

46:22 ↗ in Seattle and and get those to you. But

46:24 ↗ the idea is like if Home Depot were to

46:26 ↗ sell, that could be turned into

46:27 ↗ residential. It could

46:30 ↗ got to thank Olympia for this one.

46:32 ↗ Commissioner Miller Irwin, thank you. I

46:35 ↗ had a question in regards to the uh the

46:37 ↗ parking exemptions and the note that I

46:39 ↗ had flagged for myself is it would

46:41 ↗ certainly be nice to uh modify the

46:44 ↗ existing parking plan and it looks like

46:46 ↗ that's an exemption or cannot be done.

46:49 ↗ Can you just offer an explanation as to

46:52 ↗ why the parking is restricted to be asis

46:55 ↗ when there might be an opportunity to

46:57 ↗ possibly expanded for um I guess

47:00 ↗ development of multifamily housing.

47:05 ↗ So it's a state requirement so we can't

47:07 ↗ do that. Okay, which is why we're not.

47:10 ↗ But we're also the state is also there

47:13 ↗ are a lot of there's a lot of state

47:16 ↗ legislation that has come through

47:18 ↗ recently that is actually not allowing

47:20 ↗ us to provide any parking within a

47:22 ↗ certain distance of a transit

47:25 ↗ stop or a a major transit stop. Not all

47:28 ↗ transit stops, just major um that are

47:31 ↗ limiting the number of parking spot

47:34 ↗ stalls that we can have per unit. One

47:36 ↗ that just came through the pipeline as

47:38 ↗ you and

47:40 ↗ Not saying these are happening now that

47:42 ↗ it came it came through. I'm not sure if

47:43 ↗ it passed but to provide to you only

47:45 ↗ allowed 0.5 parking stalls per multif

47:48 ↗ family unit and only one parking parking

47:51 ↗ space per single family unit. So the

47:53 ↗ state is really trying to limit the

47:55 ↗ number of parking spaces in hopes that

47:57 ↗ more people will rely on transit rather

47:59 ↗ than cars. Makes sense. Thank you. There

48:02 ↗ it is. Uh Commissioner Mole, how does

48:05 ↗ this intersect with zoning? Because in

48:09 ↗ some of the zoning within the city,

48:12 ↗ multif family is not allowed or rather

48:14 ↗ residential is not allowed. So does this

48:17 ↗ mean that this supersedes all

48:20 ↗ zoning? Housing is

48:24 ↗ allowed in almost every zone in the

48:27 ↗ city. And yes, it would supersede the

48:29 ↗ zoning, but it is allowed in almost

48:31 ↗ every zone in the

48:34 ↗ city. I think we have

48:39 ↗ four maybe where it's not allowed. That

48:42 ↗ would be up in Isiqua Highlands in the

48:47 ↗ one of the zones up there

48:50 ↗ um commercial in the Isco Highlands

48:52 ↗ commercial zone UBCOM.

48:57 ↗ Yes. What What about do we have any land

48:59 ↗ that is zoned industrial? Because I know

49:01 ↗ in the city of Seattle residential is

49:04 ↗ not allowed in industrial zoning. It's

49:06 ↗ not allowed in the industrial zone. And

49:07 ↗ so that's a good question. I need to

49:09 ↗ double check. The state didn't say

49:10 ↗ anything on that. So when their guidance

49:11 ↗ comes out, I need to double check. It's

49:13 ↗ not out yet. But right now, the way it's

49:15 ↗ stated, you have to allow residential.

49:18 ↗ So I need to I'll need to see if they

49:19 ↗ follow up on that and get more guidance.

49:20 ↗ We do have industrial zones though.

49:27 ↗ Yeah, that does seem odd that again if

49:29 ↗ you have a commercial district that just

49:30 ↗ because a um a

49:33 ↗ commercial owner decides to sell that

49:36 ↗ you could turn that into residential,

49:38 ↗ but I know you guys are dealing with a

49:40 ↗ flood of bills from Olympia. We're all

49:43 ↗ finding out what's in these fantastic

49:44 ↗ bills.

49:48 ↗ Um yeah, I mean again I think for the

49:50 ↗ most part again with the permitted table

49:52 ↗ use as well as the review process, this

49:55 ↗ is pretty standard stuff. Obviously the

49:57 ↗ third item is really something more from

50:00 ↗ this uh state. But as far as again the

50:03 ↗ permitted use table um and the review

50:06 ↗ process table that's just house cleaning

50:08 ↗ I mean ultimately is what we're talking

50:09 ↗ about. So, right, and because we missed

50:12 ↗ it, we still have to go through the

50:14 ↗ formal process to add it back. So, when

50:17 ↗ you're talking about those two things

50:18 ↗ that we missed as far as a permitted use

50:20 ↗ table. So, again, there's nothing

50:21 ↗ nefarious, there's nothing bad here,

50:23 ↗ it's just uh there has to be a formal

50:25 ↗ process to put them

50:26 ↗ back. Um, is there anyone else like

50:29 ↗ you'd like to comment as far as

50:31 ↗ Kristen's presentation? And then this is

50:33 ↗ going to come back no more times. This

50:36 ↗ will come back at the public hearing,

50:38 ↗ correct? where we'll have u action on

50:41 ↗ it. So again, it's pretty

50:42 ↗ straightforward, but if you do have more

50:44 ↗ questions, you can feel free to reach

50:45 ↗ out to staff about it. But again, it it

50:48 ↗ seems like house clean house cleaning

50:51 ↗ and

50:52 ↗ um uh some guidance from our

50:58 ↗ capital. Would anyone else like to

51:01 ↗ comment before we uh close this part of

51:04 ↗ our regular

51:06 ↗ business? Vice Chair Patterson, quick

51:08 ↗ question on the review process table.

51:11 ↗ Um, how are those legislative decisions

51:15 ↗ being communicated today? How are you

51:17 ↗ meeting the requirement today? I guess

51:20 ↗ we do publish it in the paper when we're

51:23 ↗ about to have a public hearing. um every

51:25 ↗ meeting where these are going to be

51:27 ↗ discussed are they're they're on our

51:30 ↗ website and then the public hearing

51:32 ↗ notices

51:34 ↗ and then yeah through public meetings.

51:37 ↗ Yeah. And then when it's done we send it

51:39 ↗ to commerce

51:41 ↗ and I would imagine some of those things

51:43 ↗ will continue like we do our our PPC

51:46 ↗ meeting announcements or agenda stuff

51:48 ↗ like that that'll continue. I'm assuming

51:51 ↗ it just won't be a requirement. Correct.

51:53 ↗ And and when we do things like the

51:55 ↗ comprehensive plan that goes that's a

51:58 ↗ bigger notice we do I don't do social

52:01 ↗ media but you know you have your

52:03 ↗ neighborly

52:04 ↗ and I really don't do social media but

52:07 ↗ you have all these other platforms where

52:09 ↗ they're advertised and so our our

52:11 ↗ communications department advertises

52:13 ↗ those on as many platforms as they can

52:17 ↗ when when we have something bigger when

52:18 ↗ it's something like the clarifying

52:20 ↗ amendments. This is it. But otherwise,

52:23 ↗ we had neighborhood plans. I know for

52:24 ↗ Oldtown, when we did Oldtown, we sent

52:26 ↗ out postcards to all of the residents to

52:28 ↗ let them know of upcoming things and

52:29 ↗ what it meant and websites and so forth.

52:36 ↗ No, not at all. Commissioner Matthews,

52:38 ↗ um, it just occurred to me a little

52:39 ↗ confused about the whole footprint. Is

52:42 ↗ it when they're converting a building,

52:43 ↗ say you brought up Home Depot as an

52:45 ↗ example, are you saying the footprint

52:47 ↗ has to stay the same, but the envelope

52:49 ↗ it could be like three stories instead?

52:51 ↗ You knew this was coming. You busted me

52:53 ↗ as soon as the word footprint came out

52:55 ↗ of my mouth. I thought that was the

52:57 ↗ wrong word. Envelope. Envelope. So

53:00 ↗ envelope. You have to reuse the existing

53:02 ↗ envelope. Yes. So no, you cannot go up.

53:05 ↗ If you're going to go up, then you have

53:06 ↗ to meet our regulations. Okay. All

53:08 ↗ right. Thank you, Commissioner Mole.

53:10 ↗ When you say

53:12 ↗ envelope, do you mean that the structure

53:15 ↗ needs to remain? Because one of the

53:18 ↗ issues the city of Seattle is having

53:19 ↗ with converting office buildings to

53:22 ↗ residential is windows are very

53:24 ↗ different in residential than they are

53:26 ↗ in office. And the plenum you you have a

53:30 ↗ you don't have any place to run your

53:33 ↗ plumbing in a normal office building. So

53:36 ↗ are you saying that it needs to be that

53:40 ↗ that the the exterior structure remains?

53:44 ↗ I'm saying that the exterior structure

53:45 ↗ remains, but clearly you it needs to be

53:48 ↗ safe. It needs to be livable. So if you

53:51 ↗ need to put in more lines and more

53:52 ↗ toilets, that's great. But the outside

53:54 ↗ walls have to remain the same. You can

53:56 ↗ change out the windows. You need more

53:57 ↗ windows, you can do that, but the

53:59 ↗ framing of the building needs to remain

54:00 ↗ the same. So you can cut holes in a

54:03 ↗ cement wall. Yes. Okay. Yes. Yeah. I I

54:07 ↗ guess just for my own edification, I

54:09 ↗ mean, is this something people wanted or

54:10 ↗ is this just a a great idea that came

54:13 ↗ from nowhere? I mean, I I I don't really

54:14 ↗ see how people would want to convert a

54:16 ↗ box store. I mean, I guess I suppose

54:19 ↗ again, if it's a push for density, I

54:21 ↗ understand it. I mean, that's basically

54:22 ↗ what the last two years have been, but

54:25 ↗ practically it it doesn't make a whole

54:27 ↗ lot of sense. I mean, I would see

54:29 ↗ someone that would sell a commercial

54:31 ↗ piece of property, they would probably

54:33 ↗ most likely try to sell it to another

54:35 ↗ commercial owner. I mean, Lazy Boy was a

54:38 ↗ used to be staple. So, but uh but you

54:41 ↗ know, I would assume they would

54:44 ↗ right, but I assume it would it would

54:46 ↗ transfer into those hands. I'm just

54:47 ↗ wondering is there a big is there a big

54:49 ↗ ask for this? Not here, not in Isiqua

54:51 ↗ that I've seen. And I don't think it's a

54:53 ↗ push for density as it is just a push

54:55 ↗ for housing. It's just another option

54:58 ↗ for housing. Yeah. Yeah. Commissioner

55:00 ↗ Krauss. Hi. So, you know, you woke us

55:02 ↗ all up about this, so that's good.

55:04 ↗ Um, so what do you guys have a a

55:08 ↗ preference? Do you guys want to see this

55:09 ↗ happen? Like, do you have a point of

55:11 ↗ view that staff wants to see some of

55:14 ↗ these conversions happen or are we just

55:17 ↗ following what the state says? If it

55:19 ↗ happens, here's the rules. So, I'm

55:20 ↗ curious if you guys have a point of

55:21 ↗ view. No, it's it's a state requirement

55:24 ↗ and we welcome it. If someone wants to

55:27 ↗ come in, great. more places for people

55:30 ↗ to live. Let's build up the supply.

55:32 ↗ Yeah. Okay. Before I get to Commissioner

55:34 ↗ Millinder Irwin, is anyone else like to

55:36 ↗ speak that hasn't spoken

55:38 ↗ yet? I want to make sure we offer

55:40 ↗ everyone an opportunity to speak. It's

55:43 ↗ uh again, this is also me getting used

55:45 ↗ to a much bigger deis, so you'll have to

55:48 ↗ excuse me. It's going to take me a

55:49 ↗ meeting or two, but no one else would

55:51 ↗ like to speak.

55:54 ↗ Commission. I'm Yeah, I just want to

55:55 ↗ make sure other people. No, I used you

55:57 ↗ called me a different name than my last

55:59 ↗ I thought last time it was Commissioner

56:00 ↗ Mole. Oh, I thought I heard Mill

56:02 ↗ Commissioner Miller Erland. Yeah, that's

56:04 ↗ me. I have no further comment. Okay.

56:06 ↗ Thank you, Commissioner Miller.

56:08 ↗ Commissioner Mole. Yes. What I was going

56:10 ↗ to say was that in we we are in the path

56:13 ↗ of growth. There are plenty of areas in

56:16 ↗ the state where there is no where where

56:18 ↗ the grow there is a limited amount of

56:20 ↗ growth. And it is those areas of the

56:24 ↗ state that they that they run into

56:26 ↗ problems with converting with with

56:29 ↗ having a use for those old buildings and

56:31 ↗ B malls and things like that and see

56:33 ↗ malls that are just dying and I'm sure

56:36 ↗ the push came from areas that are not in

56:38 ↗ the path of growth.

56:43 ↗ Yeah. No, it's it's all interesting. it

56:44 ↗ just uh you know I know Isiziqua is

56:47 ↗ limited by our own topography and

56:49 ↗ there's a lot of reasons why we can't

56:51 ↗ expand. So yeah, it's just interesting.

56:55 ↗ He said a lot's happened in the last two

56:56 ↗ years I think as far as planning goes.

57:00 ↗ So uh yeah, it's been busy the last two

57:03 ↗ years. Any other further questions or

57:05 ↗ comments for

57:08 ↗ Kristen? I'm looking on the TV too for

57:10 ↗ Commissioner

57:13 ↗ Adair. Okay. Well, thank you Kristen for

57:17 ↗ that presentation. We'll be looking

57:18 ↗ forward to seeing this come back to us

57:20 ↗ uh what do you say? May the public

57:23 ↗ hearing end of May. Okay. Correct. All

57:26 ↗ right. Well, thank you. That takes care

57:28 ↗ of our regular business this evening.

57:30 ↗ So, we're going to move on to reports

57:32 ↗ and uh we'll start with city council

57:34 ↗ updates.

57:42 ↗ I don't have any tonight.

57:45 ↗ Okay. Any other business or

57:47 ↗ announcements?

57:51 ↗ Oh, nothing I can think of. Thank you.

57:54 ↗ That's perfectly fine. So, okay.

57:58 ↗ Um, I'm looking at the commission. Is

58:00 ↗ there anything for the good of the

58:01 ↗ order? Anything that you guys would like

58:03 ↗ to bring up before we adjourn?

58:09 ↗ All right. Well, again, thank you all

58:11 ↗ very much. It's great to meet uh

58:13 ↗ Commissioner Mole in person. Um

58:15 ↗ Commissioner Dar, we miss you. And

58:17 ↗ again, want to say thank you. I think I

58:19 ↗ can speak for uh Vice Chair Patterson

58:21 ↗ and myself. Thank you again for

58:23 ↗ entrusting us for another year. Um and I

58:25 ↗ also want to thank our incredible staff.

58:27 ↗ Uh we don't often say it enough, but

58:29 ↗ Amanda, Kristen, Valerie, Tisha, and of

58:33 ↗ course our unsung heroes tonight, Tim

58:35 ↗ and Chance. Thank you again for working

58:36 ↗ through these problems. It's amazing how

58:38 ↗ many of these meetings really go well

58:41 ↗ and then on one night it just everything

58:43 ↗ simply just does not work and it but

58:45 ↗ it's amazing for how many how much this

58:47 ↗ room changes hands. Everything does go

58:49 ↗ pretty smooth. So again, thank you uh to

58:53 ↗ the gentleman

58:54 ↗ upstairs. So with all business

58:57 ↗ concluded, we're going to adjourn our

58:59 ↗ meeting this evening quite early. So

59:01 ↗ hopefully you guys can go get some

59:02 ↗ dinner or you can get to your lacrosse

59:05 ↗ game. Um and we'll adjourn at 7:35 p.m.

59:08 ↗ Thank you.

59:14 ↗ Yeah, I think you'll make it.

59:16 ↗ You

Approved minutes

Extracted from the next meeting's packet, where this meeting's minutes were approved as a consent-calendar attachment.

Open PDF

Attendance

Staff (1)

Minnie Dhaliwal, Director, Community P & D Amanda Jackson, Meeting & Records Assistant Christen Leeson, Principal Planner 2. Approval of Minutes a) Minutes of March 27, 2025

Recommendations & actions (2)

Sentences extracted from the narrative containing words like recommended, requested, directed, moved, or approved. Best-effort — verify against the full minutes for context.

a) Minutes of March 27, 2025 There being no corrections or comments, the Minutes were approved.
Motion seconded by COMMISSIONER OLINER.