Planning Policy Commission · Thursday, May 8, 2025 · City Council Digest

2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES

Minutes of April 24, 2025

packet pp.3–6

Open packet at p.3 ↗

Staff report:

MINUTES PLANNING POLICY COMMISSION 6:30 p.m. – Thursday, April 24, 2025

4. REGULAR BUSINESS

Title 18: Minor, State Required, and Policy Amendments (D)

Christen Leeson, Principal Planner · packet pp.7–52

Topics: Land Use

Open packet at p.7 ↗

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.53–54

▶ Watch from 34:39 Open packet at p.53 ↗

Staff report:

Staff Support: Stephen Padua Staff Support: Christen Leeson 4/10/25 4/24/25  Chairs Election  Tree Code

866 segments .txt ↗

0:02 ↗ I think we're good to

0:08 ↗ go. All right. Good evening, everyone. I

0:12 ↗ would like to call the May 8th Planning

0:13 ↗ Policy Commission meeting to order at

0:16 ↗ 6:30

0:18 ↗ p.m. Today's meeting is a hybrid

0:20 ↗ meeting. The Planning Policy Commission

0:22 ↗ is in person, but staff or members of

0:24 ↗ the public may be attending virtually or

0:26 ↗ in person. staff, do we have a quorum

0:29 ↗ tonight?

0:31 ↗ Yes, we do. Commissioners, uh,

0:32 ↗ Commissioner Oler and Chair Voice have

0:34 ↗ excused absences tonight.

0:37 ↗ Excellent. Thank you very much,

0:39 ↗ Kristen. All right. Now, we will move on

0:41 ↗ to the minutes. Uh, so our first item of

0:45 ↗ business is to take action to approve

0:47 ↗ the minutes for the April 24th PPC

0:50 ↗ meeting. Are there any corrections to

0:52 ↗ the draft minutes provided in the agenda

0:54 ↗ packet?

0:56 ↗ Uh, shaking heads, hearing none, the

0:59 ↗ minutes are

1:00 ↗ approved. Our next item of business is

1:03 ↗ public

1:04 ↗ comment. Uh, for this meeting, we're

1:06 ↗ holding general public comment at this

1:08 ↗ time for all general topics being

1:10 ↗ discussed by the commission staff. Has

1:12 ↗ anyone signed up to make a public

1:14 ↗ comment?

1:15 ↗ No, they have not. All right. Thank you

1:18 ↗ very much. With no public comments, we

1:21 ↗ will go ahead and move

1:23 ↗ on to our next item on the agenda, which

1:26 ↗ is title 18 policy

1:29 ↗ amendments. Uh Kristen Leon, our

1:31 ↗ principal planner, will be presenting

1:33 ↗ tonight. And Kristen, whenever you're

1:35 ↗ ready, you may go

1:47 ↗ ahead.

1:52 ↗ Here we go. Good evening. I'm Kristen

1:54 ↗ Leon, principal planner for community

1:56 ↗ planning and development department. We

1:58 ↗ are we're going to talk about more

1:59 ↗ policy amendments

2:02 ↗ tonight. We are just going to review.

2:04 ↗ I'll present them and then if you all

2:06 ↗ would like, you have the opportunity to

2:07 ↗ ask questions and discuss and provide

2:09 ↗ feedback. Let us know if there's

2:11 ↗ anything else that you need prior to the

2:12 ↗ public hearing next week.

2:15 ↗ So direction from the council or

2:17 ↗ direction that we're looking for is do

2:19 ↗ you have any concerns with providing

2:20 ↗ flexibility for the common or for the

2:22 ↗ community and private amenity spaces?

2:25 ↗ Oops, excuse me. Trying to get this out

2:27 ↗ of my way.

2:30 ↗ Um, sorry, there's something. There we

2:32 ↗ go. And are the proposed changes clear

2:35 ↗ or are additional changes need needed to

2:37 ↗ add clarity?

2:43 ↗ So again, a review for you. We did our

2:47 ↗ 2023 title 18 overhaul and since it was

2:51 ↗ huge, massive, combining many documents.

2:54 ↗ So as I've said before, bound to be a

2:56 ↗ few things that might have been missed

2:57 ↗ or things that could be improved. So we

2:59 ↗ are constantly checking for quality

3:01 ↗ control. We actually have a running list

3:03 ↗ of amendments that need to be need to be

3:05 ↗ made that will be coming back to you

3:06 ↗ next year after these. We broke these

3:09 ↗ into two different groups. Clarifying

3:12 ↗ amendments and policy amendments. These

3:14 ↗ are considered policy amendments.

3:15 ↗ However, in this group, we really have

3:18 ↗ minor amendments, state required

3:20 ↗ amendments, and policy amendments that

3:22 ↗ you all will be looking at next time and

3:26 ↗ tonight. First ones are the minor

3:28 ↗ amendments. We have the you saw this

3:30 ↗ last time. There were daycare operations

3:32 ↗ in adult family homes. And there was

3:34 ↗ confusion because both of these at the

3:36 ↗ same time required home occupation

3:39 ↗ permits. However, they're also permitted

3:41 ↗ uses. So, we have removed them out of

3:43 ↗ the home occupation section and made it

3:45 ↗ just so that they require permits. But

3:47 ↗ then we realized when we brought this to

3:49 ↗ you last time that we put the standards

3:52 ↗ for each of these remained in

3:54 ↗ commercial, which doesn't make sense,

3:56 ↗ and they're in both. So, we took that

3:57 ↗ out and gave them their own section and

3:59 ↗ that's why we're giving it again to you

4:00 ↗ tonight.

4:02 ↗ our permit term extension and

4:05 ↗ expiration. a building uh so I'm sorry I

4:09 ↗ said a building permit but a land use

4:11 ↗ land use permit is issued and it will

4:16 ↗ expire anywhere from say 3 to 5 years

4:19 ↗ depending on um the permit that they

4:22 ↗ have a site development permit one two

4:24 ↗ or three or yes and in that time the 3

4:29 ↗ to 5 years a building permit needs to be

4:31 ↗ issued if the building permit is not

4:33 ↗ issued um or if it's issued I'm just

4:36 ↗ going to get all this confused. But what

4:38 ↗ hap what's happen is we don't want the

4:39 ↗ building permit to expire before that or

4:41 ↗ the land use permit to expire before

4:43 ↗ that construction permit has been

4:44 ↗ issued. So this is allowing us to extend

4:46 ↗ the land use permit. Now um caveat we

4:49 ↗ are going to this is at our city

4:52 ↗ attorney's office and this will probably

4:54 ↗ be adjusted a little bit because as I

4:57 ↗ didn't explain it very well it's

4:58 ↗ probably not written as it should be

5:00 ↗ written to be clearer. So that will be

5:01 ↗ clarified a little bit better when we

5:03 ↗ come back next time. Uh, next is our

5:05 ↗ permitted uses table. So, as you know,

5:08 ↗ we kept finding uses that were omitted

5:10 ↗ from the last one. So, we actually had a

5:13 ↗ lovely person in our office go through

5:15 ↗ every single permitted uses table that

5:19 ↗ we had prior to the update and compare

5:22 ↗ and contrast. So, we found more uses.

5:24 ↗ So, we're just bringing all of those to

5:26 ↗ you. Now, also in this, we found that

5:28 ↗ there were some footnotes that were not

5:30 ↗ included incorporated into the update.

5:33 ↗ So we are now going through all the

5:35 ↗ footnotes. So I think there may there

5:37 ↗ should be just about two uh those will

5:39 ↗ come back with the uh public hearing

5:42 ↗ edition of this on the

5:44 ↗ 22nd and with short-term long-term

5:47 ↗ bicycle parking requirements and off-

5:49 ↗ streetet parking which was put into the

5:51 ↗ wrong slot. That's not a state

5:52 ↗ requirement. It's actually a minor

5:53 ↗ amendment. All of those again there were

5:55 ↗ uses that were omitted from the 2023

5:58 ↗ update. Any questions on those?

6:03 ↗ Okay. Next, we have our tree retention

6:06 ↗ exemption. And this is a state

6:08 ↗ requirement. And the state says

6:11 ↗ that if you if someone's trying to build

6:14 ↗ a residential

6:15 ↗ development, middle or multif family

6:18 ↗ housing. And you they apply all of the

6:22 ↗ tree preservation code. And they're also

6:24 ↗ trying to comply with the parking code.

6:26 ↗ but all of the

6:28 ↗ parking makes it so that the tree does

6:31 ↗ the tree code doesn't work, then you can

6:33 ↗ either reduce or remove the parking

6:35 ↗ requirement for that residential housing

6:36 ↗ because we don't want to prohibit any

6:38 ↗ residential housing from being

6:39 ↗ constructed because it is needed.

6:42 ↗ Yes,

6:45 ↗ Commissioner Crest. So, when you have a

6:48 ↗ conflicting policy, something has to

6:51 ↗ take priority. So, did I read this

6:53 ↗ right? So, trees take priority over

6:55 ↗ parking. Yes. And can you talk more

6:59 ↗ about, you know, is that going to help

7:02 ↗ building or would the opposite help

7:04 ↗ building more where we're where someone

7:05 ↗ can build and have a have parking versus

7:07 ↗ a tree and do something different with

7:09 ↗ trees? Well, if someone's going

7:11 ↗ to, you know, if if the parking is going

7:16 ↗ to prevent if either one of those is

7:17 ↗ going to prevent residential from being

7:20 ↗ built, um, then yes, that I think I'm

7:23 ↗ not answering your question. then yes,

7:24 ↗ parking could be could be foregone. And

7:27 ↗ you know, with the middle housing, with

7:30 ↗ co-l livingiving housing,

7:32 ↗ uh with conversions of multif family

7:33 ↗ housing, the state's actually not

7:35 ↗ allowing parking to go in or they're not

7:37 ↗ requiring us to make parking go in

7:39 ↗ within a half mile of major transit

7:41 ↗ stops. So, that's just kind of the way

7:43 ↗ the state's headed right now. So, but

7:45 ↗ let's walk through the scenario here.

7:46 ↗ So, someone has a small lot and they

7:49 ↗ want to build a single family house and

7:53 ↗ I'm just trying to understand because

7:54 ↗ the trade-offs. Okay. But it doesn't

7:56 ↗ apply to single family. This is not

7:57 ↗ single family. No, it's just middle

7:59 ↗ housing and Okay. Yeah. middle housing

8:02 ↗ and and multif family housing. Okay. So,

8:04 ↗ trees take precedent over parking is

8:05 ↗ what you're saying. Yes. Okay.

8:12 ↗ Okay. And the last last one, I

8:14 ↗ apologize. I have an echo. Um but okay.

8:17 ↗ Um deviations in community amenities.

8:20 ↗ This is our policy question for you. So

8:22 ↗ we have heard that developers are

8:25 ↗ finding it difficult to build multif

8:28 ↗ family residential housing with our

8:30 ↗ current code requirements. So we are

8:33 ↗ looking at making amendments to these

8:35 ↗ and allowing deviations. Now the

8:36 ↗ deviations would provide flexibility in

8:39 ↗ order for developers to rehab or reuse

8:41 ↗ spaces and for new multif family

8:43 ↗ development.

8:44 ↗ So currently our code says that common

8:48 ↗ amenity space which is something for

8:50 ↗ everybody to use. You know maybe it's a

8:52 ↗ park in the middle of it or a big plaza.

8:55 ↗ Every unit you're required to have 100

8:56 ↗ square ft of common amenity space for

8:59 ↗ every unit that's in the building. You

9:01 ↗ are also required to have private

9:03 ↗ amenity space o private open amenity

9:06 ↗ space for every unit in the building.

9:07 ↗ which means that every unit either needs

9:09 ↗ a balcony or a patio or a big stoop,

9:13 ↗ something that that's 48 ft that's

9:15 ↗ attached to that unit to go with it. And

9:17 ↗ this is what builders are finding

9:18 ↗ difficult. So, what we're proposing is

9:21 ↗ not to change the amount of open space

9:24 ↗ and amenity space that's required, but

9:26 ↗ to allow developers to combine to do a

9:29 ↗ deviation and combine the 148 ft into

9:34 ↗ one. So if they need to, they can put

9:36 ↗ most of that that all into common space.

9:38 ↗ It can go on a rooftop deck. It can go

9:41 ↗ somewhere else. As long as 50% of the

9:43 ↗ units still have that private amenity

9:48 ↗ space as long as they can combine it. As

9:51 ↗ long as 50% of the units still have

9:54 ↗ their private amenity space.

10:02 ↗ Um, is when I was looking at the the

10:06 ↗ table, it's basically only central

10:08 ↗ Isiqua that's affected. Do I read that

10:10 ↗ correctly? It's all multif family in the

10:12 ↗ city. Okay.

10:15 ↗ Thank you, Commissioner Crest.

10:18 ↗ Um, so the so the two things you laid

10:21 ↗ out well, which is the bigger issue of

10:23 ↗ getting things built, is it the private

10:25 ↗ amenity, meaning still doing half of

10:28 ↗ them to have a balcony? Does that make

10:31 ↗ certain developments not feasible? I'm

10:33 ↗ curious with the feedback that you got,

10:35 ↗ which was the bigger issue of those two.

10:37 ↗ As I understand it, and I could be

10:38 ↗ wrong, it is the private spaces.

10:41 ↗ followup then is still requiring 50%

10:46 ↗ solve that or is that still make it hard

10:48 ↗ to build a big apartment building when

10:50 ↗ you have to have balconies and we'll

10:52 ↗ see. We are hoping that it makes it

10:54 ↗ easier for people to build. And do other

10:58 ↗ jurisdictions have this type of private?

11:00 ↗ Not that I'm aware of. No. Oh, do they

11:02 ↗ have the private requirement for units?

11:04 ↗ Yes, they do. Okay. Yes.

11:08 ↗ I had a follow-up question as well. Um,

11:10 ↗ does that only affect apartments or is

11:12 ↗ it also I mean is it apartments and

11:14 ↗ actually condos which would be owned? It

11:17 ↗ is multif family. So multif family is

11:19 ↗ anything with six units or more

11:22 ↗ and is this to actually Sorry I'm go

11:25 ↗ ahead finish your question. I was just

11:28 ↗ waiting for it to see who Commissioner

11:29 ↗ Patterson who was going to call on.

11:30 ↗ Okay. Um, does it So I kind of lost the

11:33 ↗ train of my thought here.

11:35 ↗ Uh, sorry I just totally lost the train

11:38 ↗ of my thought. Oh, good. We'll go to

11:39 ↗ Commissioner Mo and then we can come

11:40 ↗ back. Go ahead, Commissioner Mo. Okay.

11:42 ↗ So, when they said we're having trouble

11:44 ↗ building, that seems to me like a pretty

11:47 ↗ general statement. Was it that they were

11:50 ↗ having trouble with the design and

11:52 ↗ construction or was it the economics?

11:58 ↗ I believe both. It was It was the design

12:00 ↗ and the economics. So, yeah.

12:05 ↗ And when they said, "We're having

12:06 ↗ trouble buildings," did that mean they

12:08 ↗ were having trouble getting

12:12 ↗ finencil out, making it feasible?

12:20 ↗ All right.

12:22 ↗ Commissioner Crest, go ahead. I'm still

12:24 ↗ I'm still trying to noodle on how hard

12:26 ↗ the the private amenity say. So, if you

12:28 ↗ look at the veil, I'll just pick on Vale

12:30 ↗ and Atlas. Would they pass

12:33 ↗ this? Would they do they have half of

12:36 ↗ them that have a balcony? I'm just

12:39 ↗ trying to think of how hard how high how

12:41 ↗ hard of a bar this balcony for half of

12:44 ↗ apartment building. It seems like it's a

12:46 ↗ fairly high bar. And when you look at

12:48 ↗ these apartment buildings, they don't

12:49 ↗ seem like they have balconies. And I

12:54 ↗ just wonder how hard of a thing this is.

12:57 ↗ And are we painting ourselves into a

12:59 ↗ corner and we're going to be

13:00 ↗ disappointed when no one's building

13:01 ↗ anything because the economics Alice and

13:03 ↗ Vale didn't fall under these standards

13:04 ↗ when they were built. No, I mean even

13:06 ↗ under even under the our existing ones

13:09 ↗ they did. They were built prior to that.

13:12 ↗ I'm just curious, do they have

13:13 ↗ balconies? I you know what I'm trying to

13:15 ↗ envision Atlas right now and Veil and I

13:17 ↗ don't I don't think so. Yeah. I'm just

13:19 ↗ curious how we got to the 50%.

13:24 ↗ Um you we looked at some what some other

13:26 ↗ cities do and yeah we're going to have

13:29 ↗ to see how it we're have to see how it

13:30 ↗ pans out. We have a will we have another

13:32 ↗ feedback loop with not yet developers

13:35 ↗ that part of the process. Yes. Okay.

13:36 ↗ Thank you. We'll go to uh Commissioner

13:38 ↗ Ze first. Thank you. Well uh I had a

13:43 ↗ several conversations with developers

13:45 ↗ and one of the questions the way it was

13:47 ↗ presented was why are we uh and that is

13:49 ↗ something that is on my mind actually.

13:51 ↗ Why are we presenting so many uh common

13:53 ↗ amenity space

13:55 ↗ requirements? They are like they are

13:57 ↗ expensive. They don't need to be built

13:59 ↗ but the land is still expensive maybe uh

14:02 ↗ when we have all of this parks and

14:04 ↗ trails and all of the spaces that people

14:07 ↗ can use. So basically, why do we put

14:09 ↗ them inside of the um uh buildings or

14:14 ↗ surround buildings with them when people

14:16 ↗ can use spaces that are already there

14:20 ↗ and that won't take money to be produced

14:24 ↗ to be built or to be bought as a land

14:27 ↗ like whatever needs to to happen there.

14:29 ↗ That is that was my understanding kind

14:32 ↗ of that's that's what I hear. So is that

14:35 ↗ a are you asking me why we require that?

14:37 ↗ Uh well that's that's I'm just I'm I'm

14:40 ↗ basically I'm saying my understanding of

14:42 ↗ the thing about the common amenity space

14:45 ↗ like uh why do we require buildings to

14:48 ↗ have common amenity spaces when there is

14:51 ↗ a space already there like our parks our

14:54 ↗ trails all of those things. Well and

14:56 ↗ part of that when we were considering

14:57 ↗ especially during the central Isiqua

14:59 ↗ plan that's when the green necklace came

15:00 ↗ about which is now going to be creeks to

15:02 ↗ peaks. Um it's

15:05 ↗ because we were allowing all trees at

15:08 ↗ the time to be um graded if they needed

15:12 ↗ to, but we still we didn't want it to be

15:14 ↗ a concrete jungle in central Isiqua. So

15:17 ↗ we still needed those if you're in an

15:19 ↗ apartment and you have children, you

15:21 ↗ still need places for those kids to go.

15:22 ↗ If you you know have a pet, you want to

15:24 ↗ let them go out on the balcony. You want

15:26 ↗ to sit outside, you need that fresh air.

15:27 ↗ You need some spaces for people to go

15:30 ↗ inside so it's not a concrete jungle.

15:34 ↗ And that's what people were when we were

15:36 ↗ doing the central plan at the central

15:38 ↗ isqua standards. Um, you know, council

15:41 ↗ at the time was that was a concern and

15:43 ↗ with the public as well.

15:46 ↗ Commissioner Mo.

15:58 ↗ Um, I think you need to speak into your

16:00 ↗ microphone, please. I I support staff's

16:03 ↗ position that that we need more that we

16:07 ↗ need to allow for common areas and

16:09 ↗ require them because without them we

16:11 ↗ will have a concrete jungle to quote you

16:14 ↗ and because when you look at better

16:17 ↗ quality communities, they tend to allow

16:19 ↗ for outdoor areas for for children, for

16:24 ↗ people to gather. Because without those

16:26 ↗ local gathering spots, we will create a

16:30 ↗ we will create a city that is not um

16:34 ↗ communityoriented because people gather

16:36 ↗ in those community oriented spaces in

16:39 ↗ small areas. You have the neighborhood

16:41 ↗ park concept. Um the one question I the

16:45 ↗ one thing I did want to say is that when

16:48 ↗ I think about what 48 square ft is,

16:50 ↗ that's really 8 ft across, 6 ft deep.

16:55 ↗ That's all it is is a stand is a fairly

16:57 ↗ standard balcony um more than a Juliet

17:00 ↗ balcony which might be 12 feet across

17:02 ↗ and 4T deep. And so I I question the

17:08 ↗ comment we can't afford to build because

17:11 ↗ if they're still having to build 50% of

17:13 ↗ the units, I'm trying to figure out how

17:15 ↗ much of a cost savings there really

17:17 ↗ is. That's my opinion.

17:21 ↗ Commissioner Adair.

17:23 ↗ Yeah. I just want to throw in I agree. I

17:26 ↗ think community space is really

17:28 ↗ important. I think it's important for

17:30 ↗ the feel of Isiqua to maintain that. I

17:32 ↗ think it's important to create third

17:34 ↗ places for people to gather. It's

17:37 ↗ important to have safe places for kids

17:39 ↗ to play. Um I'm all for allowing

17:42 ↗ flexibility between community and

17:44 ↗ private open space, but I do think that

17:46 ↗ there needs to be a space requirement.

17:49 ↗ And so I think this is a good start. we

17:51 ↗ can get some feedback. But yeah,

17:58 ↗ Commissioner Matthews,

18:01 ↗ so my uh where I was originally going to

18:04 ↗ ask was this is not driven by having to

18:06 ↗ put in affordable housing. This is

18:07 ↗ driven just by in general cost related

18:10 ↗ to developing an apartment complex or a

18:12 ↗ condo complex. Is that correct? That is

18:14 ↗ correct. Okay. Because I I also agree

18:17 ↗ live I live in a complex that has a huge

18:20 ↗ green space. Excuse me. And some of the

18:22 ↗ units nearby have none. So they come

18:25 ↗ into our space. So you end up giving the

18:29 ↗ burden of pay, you know, taking care of

18:31 ↗ a space to somebody else. What you

18:33 ↗ really want to do is make sure everybody

18:34 ↗ has space again for kids and for pets or

18:38 ↗ whatever. Each kind of unit should

18:41 ↗ actually have their own common space.

18:44 ↗ So, I completely agree. It's a good

18:45 ↗ start. Thank you.

18:51 ↗ Uh, I'll ask a question. Can you remind

18:53 ↗ me with a deviation, is that something

18:54 ↗ that has to be approved through the

18:56 ↗ permitting process or is that like an

18:58 ↗ option that they can take? It has to be

19:00 ↗ approved through the permitting process.

19:01 ↗ Gotcha. I assume as long as they're

19:04 ↗ meeting those requirements, it's

19:06 ↗ typically approved. Yes. There's no

19:08 ↗ reason you would deny it, right? If if

19:10 ↗ they're meeting the code, then we would

19:12 ↗ then we would approve it. Okay, any

19:14 ↗ other questions at this

19:16 ↗ point? All right, back over to you,

19:25 ↗ Kristen. There it is. I forgot to show

19:27 ↗ this to you earlier. There you go.

19:31 ↗ Sorry. Leave that up there for a

19:40 ↗ second. Okay. So actually all I have are

19:42 ↗ timing and next steps. So next meeting

19:45 ↗ on May 22nd is the public hearing and

19:48 ↗ then we are tenatively going to the

19:51 ↗ planning, development and environment

19:52 ↗ committee on June 10th and then on July

19:54 ↗ 7th to city council for

19:58 ↗ action. So these are our I think you all

20:01 ↗ may have addressed some of these

20:03 ↗ already, but if you have any more

20:04 ↗ questions.

20:07 ↗ All right, commissioners. I think we've

20:09 ↗ seen some of these once before. This is

20:10 ↗ kind of our second crack at then we'll

20:12 ↗ get one more opportunity in a couple

20:14 ↗ weeks when we take formal action. So now

20:16 ↗ would be the time that if you have any

20:18 ↗ questions or or any additional

20:20 ↗ information you'd want between now and

20:22 ↗ uh the public hearing, now is kind of

20:24 ↗ our opportunity to ask. Uh we'll go with

20:27 ↗ uh Commissioner Adair and then

20:29 ↗ Commissioner Crest. Yeah. Um I just

20:31 ↗ always like specifics. So if there's

20:33 ↗ like a specific development and they're

20:35 ↗ running into roadblocks because of this

20:37 ↗ and we could hear about it, that would

20:39 ↗ be great. Okay.

20:43 ↗ So I understand so you have two

20:44 ↗ different things. You have public and

20:46 ↗ private and uh I'm curious if there's a

20:50 ↗ thought of and we had some good

20:52 ↗ discussion. I think public is really

20:53 ↗ important because I think that's a

20:54 ↗ longerl lasting um thing that the city

20:57 ↗ will have forever and ever when you have

20:59 ↗ um green spaces. Do you see there's

21:02 ↗ another variant

21:04 ↗ where the a developer can have the

21:07 ↗ option of not doing any private but do

21:09 ↗ even a larger public as a trade or and

21:12 ↗ give them the flexibility of you have

21:14 ↗ instead of just one or two things you

21:17 ↗ have a broader menu of options of the

21:20 ↗ things that are acceptable to the city

21:22 ↗ because I could see that as one because

21:24 ↗ then you could build if they're building

21:25 ↗ apartments they may not need balconies

21:27 ↗ but you have a nice um outdoor space

21:30 ↗ that could serve as a great place for

21:32 ↗ people to let their dogs out and all

21:33 ↗ that. Well, that's what this does

21:35 ↗ because they would still be required.

21:37 ↗ Well, 50% of them still have to have a

21:39 ↗ balcony, right? 50% would h But the

21:41 ↗ thing is they they would still have to

21:43 ↗ have if you have I'm really bad at math.

21:46 ↗ If you have 10 units, Yep. Right. They

21:48 ↗ each have to have 148 square ft

21:51 ↗ of space, private amenity and then

21:54 ↗ common amenity. Now they have the option

21:57 ↗ to still provide 148 square f feet per

22:01 ↗ unit but for 50 of those units the 48

22:04 ↗ square ft would be combined with the

22:06 ↗ common open space. So then they do get a

22:08 ↗ bigger open space but then for but then

22:10 ↗ 50 of the units would still have 48

22:12 ↗ square feet individually on there. So

22:14 ↗ here's here's I'll throw out an example.

22:16 ↗ You could say, okay, we have to have

22:18 ↗ even a bigger um public space but have

22:21 ↗ no requirements for private space is one

22:23 ↗ of the options for a developer to have.

22:25 ↗ So they have 200 square feet per unit

22:28 ↗ and an outdoor space but no balconies on

22:30 ↗ any units. Is that something that we

22:32 ↗ would want to entertain as as so you

22:35 ↗ have a menu of of options to make it

22:38 ↗ easier for them to build something that

22:39 ↗ may be right for any given area? That is

22:42 ↗ something that the planning policy

22:43 ↗ commission could propose as a motion

22:45 ↗ when this comes to a public hearing.

22:46 ↗ Okay. Yeah.

22:55 ↗ Commissioner, I have a question about

22:56 ↗ the trees. The minor amendment regarding

22:59 ↗ the trees.

23:00 ↗ Um, it appeared to me

23:02 ↗ that that the state, you said it's

23:06 ↗ statemandated. Yes.

23:09 ↗ Does our tree green policy

23:15 ↗ uh allow

23:18 ↗ for the

23:21 ↗ for because because trees take precedent

23:24 ↗ over

23:25 ↗ parking. Does our

23:28 ↗ policy allow parking to Is there any way

23:31 ↗ that we can create our policy so that we

23:37 ↗ um can have people replant smaller

23:40 ↗ trees? So, so that if you've got a tree

23:42 ↗ in that's in the like the middle of your

23:44 ↗ driveway where the driveway has to go

23:47 ↗ that you could say plant smaller trees.

23:49 ↗ So, again, this only this only applies

23:52 ↗ to middle housing and multif family

23:55 ↗ housing. So not single family housing.

23:56 ↗ So it's probably not going to be in

23:57 ↗ somebody's driveway. Well, I was

23:58 ↗ thinking like

24:00 ↗ condos those driveways when I said we do

24:02 ↗ allow people to if they remove a tree,

24:05 ↗ you plant a tree. And Minnie, do you

24:07 ↗ want to step in here? Am I Am I on Am I

24:08 ↗ on track here? Okay, I'm on track.

24:13 ↗ Yeah. And and I mean, yeah. And to

24:16 ↗ Minnie's point, that's probably a better

24:17 ↗ discussion to have with the tree code

24:19 ↗ when it comes back in two weeks. Okay.

24:20 ↗ Because that's one of the public

24:21 ↗ hearings that we're having. Okay.

24:27 ↗ Commissioner Matthews, can I ask a

24:29 ↗ question just about the deviation versus

24:31 ↗ a variance? Is there a is a deviation in

24:34 ↗ there to make so you don't have to go

24:36 ↗ through the whole variance process? Is

24:39 ↗ that because it says that if you get

24:42 ↗ rejected on your dev the

24:45 ↗ dev that you could go right into the

24:47 ↗ variance process. So it's kind of like

24:49 ↗ why are we just not going straight to

24:51 ↗ the variance process? I'm phoning a

24:52 ↗ friend. Okay.

24:54 ↗ Sure. Uh so you know the basic concept

24:57 ↗ here for this deviation the community

24:59 ↗ open spaces because we heard from

25:01 ↗ developers that um some of the reasons

25:04 ↗ are you know moisture penetration. It

25:07 ↗ does rain around here. So when you have

25:09 ↗ a building that has to have these they

25:12 ↗ have to treat it better so that you know

25:14 ↗ for the long term and things of that

25:16 ↗ nature. So, and the other thing I think

25:19 ↗ before the title 18 update, uh the

25:22 ↗ requirement in central ISO was lower. It

25:25 ↗ was 48 square ft per unit and you could

25:27 ↗ choose between outdoor or uh private.

25:31 ↗ The discussion with the community and

25:32 ↗ the planning and policy commission at

25:34 ↗ the time and all the parks board and

25:36 ↗ others was that's not enough. And so

25:39 ↗ therefore, I think the standard was

25:42 ↗ proposed was 100 square feet. the

25:45 ↗ community and the boards and commissions

25:47 ↗ said, "Yes, 100 is fine, but we also

25:49 ↗ need uh private open space." And so that

25:52 ↗ happened at a community, you know,

25:54 ↗ through that discussion. And so now

25:57 ↗ we're just bringing forward in terms of

25:58 ↗ the two applicants that we've kind of

26:00 ↗ heard this from um that perhaps every

26:04 ↗ unit getting a balconies and although

26:07 ↗ you can do rooftop terraces and private

26:09 ↗ open spaces and patios and ground floor

26:11 ↗ and all those count towards private open

26:13 ↗ space but generally the most cost

26:15 ↗ effective way they're saying is it's by

26:18 ↗ putting balconies. So all that to say um

26:21 ↗ deviation versus a variance uh part of

26:24 ↗ your question uh deviation is

26:26 ↗ administrative. So it's less it's

26:28 ↗ provides more flexibility during their

26:30 ↗ permit review process. It isn't a

26:33 ↗ separate thing that they have to apply

26:34 ↗ for a variance. The bar for a variance

26:37 ↗ is very very high. You know you you

26:40 ↗ can't do your project unless you grant

26:42 ↗ you're granted this variance. It's a

26:43 ↗ public hearing process. A hearing

26:45 ↗ examiner makes that decision. But it's

26:48 ↗ meant for places where you have a really

26:50 ↗ odd shaped lot and you can't meet your

26:52 ↗ setbacks or you have a topography

26:54 ↗ challenge that you're going to exceed

26:55 ↗ the height and otherwise you can't

26:57 ↗ develop your property or something of uh

26:59 ↗ of that nature and you have to meet all

27:00 ↗ eight criteria. So this deviation is

27:03 ↗ meant more as a flexibility tool to to

27:06 ↗ say you still meet the intent of getting

27:08 ↗ this but not every unit has to have a

27:11 ↗ balcony and 50 really is debatable. So

27:14 ↗ if uh planning and policy commission

27:17 ↗ feels like well if you're giving

27:18 ↗ flexibility let's just give it any or

27:21 ↗ all we could certainly go down that

27:22 ↗ path. Uh if you want to say one-third uh

27:25 ↗ you know we're soliciting feedback so

27:27 ↗ hopefully we can hear from folks you

27:30 ↗ know to what type of I mean we know from

27:32 ↗ the development community it's probably

27:33 ↗ going to be more flexibility is better

27:35 ↗ because each project is different each

27:37 ↗ location is different and how we kind of

27:39 ↗ go down that path. the the the

27:41 ↗ livability component for the people

27:43 ↗ living in the units. Um, you know, the

27:46 ↗ other other stuff that we've heard

27:47 ↗ around this topic is people don't use

27:49 ↗ their balconies even if they have them.

27:51 ↗ They use it for storage of their bikes

27:54 ↗ and and you know, extra stuff. Um, so it

27:58 ↗ it's

27:59 ↗ really a policy decision for you all to

28:03 ↗ consider what what makes sense in a

28:05 ↗ context.

28:09 ↗ We go commissioner Crest first. I wanted

28:11 ↗ to make one note really quickly along

28:12 ↗ with that. So when you do the as many

28:14 ↗ mentioned that you know that the um the

28:17 ↗ deviation is administrative. It's but

28:19 ↗ the variances we only give variances for

28:21 ↗ things like impervious surface and

28:24 ↗ building on critical areas or steep

28:26 ↗ slopes. Those are things that are going

28:27 ↗ to affect the land itself and how it may

28:30 ↗ affect other things outside of it.

28:32 ↗ whether people build um you know

28:34 ↗ balconies all hundred you know all

28:36 ↗ balconies on all units or whether they

28:37 ↗ combine that into comm community common

28:39 ↗ space that's not going to have the same

28:41 ↗ effect on others that fall on that site.

28:45 ↗ So rooftop deck on a new apartment

28:48 ↗ building would that be that would be

28:49 ↗ public though not private is that

28:51 ↗ correct? I just want to make sure which

28:52 ↗ which side that would fall on. Well

28:54 ↗ these are all called it's actually

28:55 ↗ called common open space. Yeah, it could

28:58 ↗ be common, but you could designate plots

29:01 ↗ on that for, you know, some senior uh

29:03 ↗ developments in Seattle have where they

29:06 ↗ get their plot for gardening. That's a

29:08 ↗ rooftop thing, but it's a privately

29:09 ↗ designated plot for you. So, but most of

29:12 ↗ the rooftop uh amenities are common.

29:15 ↗ Okay. So, if you have like a big area

29:16 ↗ with picnic tables and and barbecues and

29:18 ↗ and patios, that would be in the that

29:21 ↗ would count as the public aspect.

29:22 ↗ Correct. And sometimes, you know, with

29:24 ↗ the kind of um, you know, larger scale

29:26 ↗ apartment buildings, you see um, parking

29:29 ↗ on the lower two floors and the lid of

29:31 ↗ that parking is where they put their

29:33 ↗ open space. So, the units that open on

29:36 ↗ to that open space will have somewhat of

29:38 ↗ a little, you know, private open space

29:41 ↗ and then the common, which also, you

29:43 ↗ know, I think the one of the developers

29:45 ↗ was saying is a better thing for them

29:48 ↗ because it's you don't have someone just

29:50 ↗ walking by your windows and things like

29:51 ↗ that. So you get a little private space

29:53 ↗ and then you have your common space

29:54 ↗ around it.

29:56 ↗ Uh Commissioner Hair,

29:58 ↗ uh yeah, just to throw out to see if

30:00 ↗ this would be feasible, but on the idea

30:02 ↗ of giving people flexibility, could we

30:05 ↗ do something where we said, "Hey,

30:08 ↗ any unit that opens directly onto a

30:11 ↗ common space, you can combine their

30:12 ↗ private space with the common square

30:15 ↗ footage." And it's only units that are

30:16 ↗ isolated from the common space that have

30:19 ↗ the private space. amendment and that

30:21 ↗ way kind of everybody in the building is

30:24 ↗ getting access to outdoor space, but you

30:27 ↗ know, the way that depending on how they

30:29 ↗ design it, we could they could combine

30:31 ↗ all of their private as long as that

30:34 ↗ unit opens into the community space. I I

30:37 ↗ think that's what what we're trying

30:38 ↗ actually to kind of propose right now.

30:40 ↗ So, if you have 148 ft, excuse

30:44 ↗ me, if they're required to have 148 ft

30:47 ↗ and you're on that first floor and it

30:49 ↗ opens up into the common space, there's

30:50 ↗ your 148 ft. As long as, you know, all

30:53 ↗ in all it all adds up to

30:55 ↗ your 148 ft that those 10 units need.

30:59 ↗ So, yeah, good math. Uh, Commissioner

31:03 ↗ Mole, um, I'd like to say that I very

31:06 ↗ much appreciate the historic how we got

31:09 ↗ here. because it changed my opinion. And

31:13 ↗ I think had I not had the history

31:17 ↗ because since we only served two years

31:20 ↗ and especially for for a new member

31:23 ↗ understanding the history of how this

31:25 ↗ came to

31:27 ↗ be completely changed my perception. So

31:30 ↗ in in the future when you have something

31:32 ↗ like this if you could give us a brief

31:34 ↗ synopsis of the history of how we got

31:36 ↗ here I think it would be

31:39 ↗ helpful might be asking too much of you

31:41 ↗ I don't know but I think it would be

31:43 ↗ helpful and the other option is we are

31:45 ↗ always open so if you you know if a

31:48 ↗ commissioner calls us and says I really

31:49 ↗ need the history on that well then maybe

31:51 ↗ other ones do too so we can do that

31:53 ↗ absolutely

31:56 ↗ can confirm staff is great at uh

31:59 ↗ handling all of our questions and uh at

32:01 ↗ all hours of the day. Um, no, I think

32:05 ↗ just to kind of piggyback off this

32:06 ↗ conversation is I I do feel like it's a

32:08 ↗ little bit of a Goldilocks thing where

32:10 ↗ at first we had it sounded like pretty

32:12 ↗ much no requirements about community

32:14 ↗ space or at least not what they were

32:16 ↗ today and that was too cold. And then we

32:18 ↗ went to this 148 ft. Now that's too hot.

32:22 ↗ So now we're trying the just right

32:23 ↗ approach of of the 50% and the you know

32:26 ↗ flexibility. So, uh, as we can see by

32:29 ↗ that historic sample size, there's

32:31 ↗ opportunities to to, you know, pivot as

32:34 ↗ needed. And this is kind of one of those

32:36 ↗ those pivots. And if it doesn't work

32:38 ↗ out, you know, we can always revisit.

32:39 ↗ But it sounds like based on the feedback

32:41 ↗ that we've now gotten from developers,

32:43 ↗ uh, we can hopefully find the the happy

32:47 ↗ medium. Uh, any other questions,

32:50 ↗ comments?

32:54 ↗ Okay. All right. That's all I have.

33:02 ↗ Awesome. All right. Well, thank you,

33:04 ↗ Kristen, and thank you, uh, Director

33:07 ↗ Doyle Wall for hopping in there as well.

33:08 ↗ Always nice to have all your

33:10 ↗ perspectives on

33:12 ↗ that. Oh, that alarm can only mean one

33:15 ↗ thing. It's time for city council

33:17 ↗ updates.

33:21 ↗ All right. Uh, Kristen, do we have any

33:23 ↗ city council updates? That was really

33:25 ↗ good.

33:26 ↗ Um, just one and actually you all won't

33:29 ↗ see this but it's it's interesting.

33:31 ↗ It'll go to the development commission

33:32 ↗ but the site plan for the transit

33:34 ↗ oriented development trail head came in

33:37 ↗ and for those of you who don't know it's

33:38 ↗ been years in progress. It'll go next to

33:41 ↗ the transit center. It is a joint

33:44 ↗ venture with uh King County Housing

33:46 ↗ Authority and private developer. And so

33:49 ↗ the half of the complex will be market

33:52 ↗ rate. The other half will be affordable

33:55 ↗ units. There will be some transitional

33:56 ↗ units in there. I it's around and I'm

33:59 ↗ not going to have these numbers right

34:00 ↗ because they keep changing, but around

34:02 ↗ 165 affordable and 155 market rate um

34:05 ↗ with a together sort of center in the

34:06 ↗ middle to uh for people to use. So

34:10 ↗ anyway, that um it's gone to council a

34:12 ↗ little bit. They're talking about some

34:13 ↗ deviations from our standards to help

34:14 ↗ make it work. Um but

34:17 ↗ it's it's next door to the transit

34:19 ↗ center. So there used to be a Quest or

34:21 ↗ PSSE

34:23 ↗ um station there and they just they're

34:24 ↗ moving that tower if they haven't

34:26 ↗ already over to Tibets and then they're

34:27 ↗ going to put the structure there. So

34:29 ↗ just kind of a fun thing to watch. Yeah,

34:32 ↗ there we go.

34:34 ↗ Very cool. All right. And next on our

34:39 ↗ agenda would be other business or

34:40 ↗ announcements. No, I just wanted to

34:43 ↗ remind you that the next time we do have

34:44 ↗ two public hearings. So, the tree code,

34:47 ↗ tree preservation update, and all of the

34:50 ↗ policy code amendments. So, bring snacks

34:52 ↗ and and and get a good night's sleep the

34:55 ↗ night before. Eat your weebies, start

34:57 ↗ hydrating

34:58 ↗ now. Excellent. Uh, commissioners, is

35:01 ↗ there any other questions, concerns,

35:03 ↗ business for the

35:05 ↗ evening? All right. Well, if there is no

35:08 ↗ further business uh before the

35:10 ↗ commission, then we would like to

35:11 ↗ adjourn this meeting at 7:05 p.m.

Minutes for this meeting haven't been published yet. Council and committee minutes are approved at the next meeting and embedded as a consent-calendar attachment in that meeting's agenda packet — they will appear here once that next packet is processed.