Planning Policy Commission · Thursday, January 8, 2026 · City Council Digest

2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES

Minutes of November 13, 2025

packet pp.3–8

▶ Watch from 1:16 Open packet at p.3 ↗

Staff report:

MINUTES PLANNING POLICY COMMISSION 6:30 p.m. – Thursday, November 13, 2025

4. REGULAR BUSINESS

2026 Docket of Proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendments (D)

Kate Kaehny, Principal Planner · packet pp.9–14

Topics: Land Use

Open packet at p.9 ↗

Staff report:

The purpose of the January 8

5. REPORTS

Council Update

6. OTHER BUSINESS / ANNOUNCEMENTS

Upcoming Schedule

packet pp.15–17

▶ Watch from 31:16 Open packet at p.15 ↗

Staff report:

Planning Policy Commission 2026 Schedule (subject to change) 1/9/26 1/22/26

785 segments .txt ↗

0:22 ↗ Good evening everyone.

0:25 ↗ Uh hope you all had a happy new year.

0:29 ↗ It's good to see everybody.

0:32 ↗ We're going to call the January 8th

0:33 ↗ Planning Policy Commission to order and

0:35 ↗ it is currently

0:38 ↗ 6:32 p.m. Today's meeting is a hybrid

0:41 ↗ meeting. The Planning Policy Commission

0:43 ↗ is in person, but staff or members of

0:46 ↗ the public may be attending virtually or

0:48 ↗ in person.

0:50 ↗ Uh Kristen, do we have a quorum this

0:52 ↗ evening?

0:52 ↗ >> Yes, we do.

0:54 ↗ >> All right. And we'll just make a quick

0:55 ↗ mention that Commissioner Crass is

0:57 ↗ joining us online. Uh, Vice Chair

0:59 ↗ Patterson,

1:01 ↗ Commissioner Matthews, and Commissioner

1:03 ↗ Mulberu all have excused absences.

1:07 ↗ Correct.

1:08 ↗ Mulberu is going to try and join us

1:10 ↗ online.

1:11 ↗ >> Okay. We'll see if she shows up. We're

1:14 ↗ going to begin this evening with the

1:16 ↗ approval of minutes. And these go way

1:19 ↗ back, way back before Thanksgiving.

1:22 ↗ So, if you can remember, this was the

1:24 ↗ meeting for November 13th. Um, we're

1:27 ↗ looking for any corrections or concerns

1:28 ↗ you may have about that meeting.

1:31 ↗ >> Commissioner Er,

1:32 ↗ >> I have one very minor uh typo correction

1:36 ↗ on page three, the third paragraph down

1:40 ↗ that begins, Commissioner Adair. The

1:43 ↗ last part of that paragraph, it says,

1:46 ↗ "And the city that the city if

1:49 ↗ interested,

1:51 ↗ I think it should be that the city is

1:53 ↗ interested."

1:54 ↗ Just one letter.

1:56 ↗ >> We can make that correction.

1:57 ↗ >> Thanks. Thank you, Commissioner Oler.

1:59 ↗ Thank you for reading your packet.

2:01 ↗ Okay. Are there any other qu uh

2:03 ↗ concerns?

2:06 ↗ All right. Seeing none,

2:09 ↗ uh those meeting minutes are approved.

2:10 ↗ With those minor corrections, we're

2:12 ↗ going to move on to our public comment.

2:15 ↗ And right now, we are holding a general

2:16 ↗ public comment for topics pertaining to

2:19 ↗ the commission as a whole. Has anyone

2:22 ↗ signed up this evening to make comment?

2:55 ↗ Yes, Melissa Navaro has signed up to

2:58 ↗ speak.

3:01 ↗ >> Oh,

3:04 ↗ okay.

3:04 ↗ >> Then no.

3:05 ↗ >> All right. Um

3:08 ↗ Okay. How about online? Anybody online?

3:13 ↗ Okay,

3:15 ↗ nobody would like to speak this evening,

3:17 ↗ so we will skip some boilerplate there.

3:22 ↗ We're going to move along to regular

3:24 ↗ business and tonight our regular

3:26 ↗ business is the 2026 docket of proposed

3:30 ↗ comprehensive plan amendments.

3:32 ↗ Uh, this is our first item of regular

3:34 ↗ business and Kate, I'm probably going to

3:37 ↗ get this wrong. Kate Kaney

3:40 ↗ Kany Kate Kany

3:43 ↗ >> our principal planner will be presenting

3:44 ↗ this evening. So Kate Kaney please go

3:47 ↗ ahead when you're ready.

3:49 ↗ >> Okay. Give me just one moment to open up

3:51 ↗ my presentation. Get situated.

4:09 ↗ Is that in the right mode? It is. Great.

4:13 ↗ Okay. Um, thank you all very much. Uh,

4:16 ↗ this is my first presentation in front

4:18 ↗ of uh, this commission and again my name

4:21 ↗ is Kate Kaney. Uh, last name kind of

4:23 ↗ remind or sorry sounds like rainy lot of

4:26 ↗ letters but that's pretty much it. Um, I

4:29 ↗ have been here for two months as is

4:31 ↗ principal planner and uh, it has been

4:34 ↗ just a really wonderful experience so

4:36 ↗ far. I'm very happy to be here tonight.

4:38 ↗ Um I am here to talk to you about the uh

4:41 ↗ 2026 docket of proposed comprehensive

4:43 ↗ plan amendments. Um

4:47 ↗ next slide. Uh and it this tonight is

4:50 ↗ really just anformational briefing. Um

4:52 ↗ two main items. Uh first an overview of

4:55 ↗ the docket process. Uh many of you may

4:57 ↗ have gone through this already but I

4:59 ↗ wanted to provide that overview for

5:00 ↗ those of you who are not familiar and

5:02 ↗ for the public. Um and then also review

5:05 ↗ of the proposed amendments. So tonight

5:08 ↗ is not about approving anything. It's

5:11 ↗ really a learning and discussion

5:12 ↗ session.

5:16 ↗ So as you uh listen to the discussion

5:20 ↗ tonight and you're thinking through the

5:21 ↗ next steps, your ultimate recommendation

5:23 ↗ on these proposals, um here are some

5:26 ↗ considerations. Um are there amendments

5:28 ↗ proposed in the docket that are not

5:31 ↗ relevant or necessary? Um, are there any

5:33 ↗ additions, deletions, or amendments the

5:35 ↗ commission would like to recommend? Um,

5:38 ↗ this slide will pop up at the end right

5:40 ↗ before your discussion. Um, so we're

5:42 ↗ interested in hearing from you. Thought

5:44 ↗ that would just kind of help you frame

5:46 ↗ uh your thinking. So, the first thing

5:49 ↗ I'd like to do is start with some

5:50 ↗ background on the overall amendment

5:52 ↗ process. So uh the state growth

5:55 ↗ management act um requires comprehensive

5:58 ↗ plans to manage growth and there's also

6:01 ↗ a requirement for uh the public to be

6:03 ↗ able to make uh proposals to amend that

6:06 ↗ comprehensive plan and there are

6:09 ↗ procedures therefore that uh there is

6:12 ↗ direction on and many cities call that a

6:15 ↗ docket process docketing process as is.

6:18 ↗ So the state also allows amendments once

6:20 ↗ a year. Some cities do the annual

6:22 ↗ amendment like Isiziqua, some do uh

6:24 ↗ bianual processes, but we are here in

6:26 ↗ this annual process kicking it off

6:29 ↗ tonight. In terms of review, um the city

6:32 ↗ establishes procedures for docketing in

6:35 ↗ the municipal code and it includes

6:37 ↗ criteria for amending the comprehensive

6:39 ↗ plan and we'll go through that criteria

6:41 ↗ part of this presentation. So, I'm going

6:44 ↗ to go through what the process is as it

6:46 ↗ is uh stated in the code. Um, basically,

6:50 ↗ it's um a two-year process where uh the

6:54 ↗ comprehensive plan is opened up for the

6:56 ↗ public to provide amendments, but you

6:58 ↗ must have your application in by

7:01 ↗ September uh in the year before the

7:04 ↗ amendments are actually adopted. Um

7:06 ↗ staff works to assemble uh the proposals

7:09 ↗ from the public, privately initiated

7:11 ↗ amendments. um also gathering uh ideas

7:13 ↗ and proposals from um city staff. Uh and

7:17 ↗ in the actual year of the amendments uh

7:20 ↗ that would or sorry the adoption of the

7:22 ↗ amendment so we're calling it year two

7:23 ↗ in this slide um the code requires a

7:27 ↗ public hearing by the end of January and

7:30 ↗ uh that is uh held by the planning comm

7:33 ↗ planning policy commission um and the uh

7:36 ↗ public hearing will be at your next

7:38 ↗ meeting which is January 22nd and that

7:40 ↗ is when we will be requesting a

7:42 ↗ recommendation from the commission to be

7:44 ↗ forwarded to council. So uh at this

7:48 ↗ point in time uh this again is

7:49 ↗ anformational review public hearing will

7:51 ↗ be your next meeting. Um then your

7:54 ↗ recommendation will go to the planning

7:56 ↗ development and environment committee PP

7:58 ↗ that standing committee. Um they will

8:00 ↗ review and make a recommendation to the

8:02 ↗ full council and then uh full council

8:05 ↗ will take action on a final docket which

8:08 ↗ will be further considered over the

8:10 ↗ year.

8:12 ↗ So what happens after that final docket

8:15 ↗ is established by council? Well, staff

8:17 ↗ uh does the research necessary and

8:19 ↗ analysis and develops uh the text

8:22 ↗ amendments, actual language for the

8:24 ↗ comprehensive plan or uh amendments to

8:27 ↗ the uh maps in the comprehensive plan,

8:30 ↗ specifically the land use map. Uh the

8:34 ↗ next step is to allow public review. Um

8:38 ↗ and another public hearing is held by

8:40 ↗ the uh PPC and the commissioners would

8:42 ↗ make a recommendation on the final

8:44 ↗ amendment uh that would again go to PE

8:47 ↗ and then council action is required by

8:49 ↗ the end of the year. So that is the

8:52 ↗ overall process.

8:54 ↗ So I mentioned that there is uh criteria

8:58 ↗ um that is established in the code for

9:00 ↗ review for assessing evaluating um some

9:04 ↗ proposals. Specifically uh the code uh

9:08 ↗ states that staff must evaluate all

9:10 ↗ privately initiated amendment petitions

9:13 ↗ to determine compliance with this review

9:16 ↗ uh criteria established in chapter 18104

9:19 ↗ of the mun municipal code. Um, not only

9:24 ↗ though are privately initiated

9:26 ↗ amendments considered for for u

9:28 ↗ appropriateness for the comprehensive

9:30 ↗ plan, but the growth management act

9:32 ↗ requires that all proposed amendments to

9:34 ↗ your comprehensive plan are consistent

9:36 ↗ with the vision adopted in that

9:38 ↗ comprehensive plan and those existing

9:39 ↗ policies. So staff is well aware of that

9:41 ↗ as we move through uh working with uh

9:44 ↗ within our department and within other

9:46 ↗ departments to make sure that proposals

9:47 ↗ are appropriated.

9:51 ↗ So now I want to go through what the

9:52 ↗ criteria actually is in case you are

9:55 ↗ interested. Um we have only city

9:57 ↗ initiated proposals this year but um

9:59 ↗ again this is valuable for just general

10:02 ↗ um awareness. Um so there's two sets of

10:05 ↗ criteria. Um either a proposal must meet

10:07 ↗ one of the criteria you see in ABC here.

10:10 ↗ Um if a proposal is specific to a site

10:13 ↗ maybe changing the land use designation

10:14 ↗ in the land use map uh the property

10:17 ↗ needs to be suitable for the type of

10:19 ↗ development desired and the change must

10:21 ↗ conform with uh adjacent land uses. Um

10:25 ↗ criterion B is that state law or a legal

10:28 ↗ order is requiring the change and

10:31 ↗ sometimes there are technical errors in

10:32 ↗ the comprehensive plan that that can be

10:34 ↗ addressed. So that also follows in this

10:36 ↗ set of criteria. The second set of

10:38 ↗ criteria

10:41 ↗ um has four uh criterion. So um the

10:45 ↗ proposed amendment uh must meet all of

10:48 ↗ the following. That the amendment

10:50 ↗ addresses a uh matter that's

10:52 ↗ appropriately addressed through uh the

10:54 ↗ comp plan. Uh it demonstrates public

10:56 ↗ benefit and enhances the public health,

10:58 ↗ safety, and welfare in the city. Excuse

11:02 ↗ me.

11:02 ↗ um that the proposal does not raise

11:04 ↗ issues more appropriately addressed uh

11:06 ↗ through a city program. That the

11:09 ↗ proposal uh significantly um sorry that

11:12 ↗ the proposal addresses uh significant

11:15 ↗ changes in circumstances and conditions

11:18 ↗ uh uh since the last time the

11:20 ↗ comprehensive plan was amendment and

11:22 ↗ also that it is consistent with the

11:23 ↗ comprehensive plan and uh the regional

11:26 ↗ and state goals and policies. That's

11:28 ↗ really consistent with anything as I

11:29 ↗ mentioned before. So those are the

11:32 ↗ criteria that are in the code. Thought

11:33 ↗ you all would find that um helpful

11:36 ↗ thinking through things. Um just in

11:38 ↗ summary um as I said before all of the

11:41 ↗ proposals this year are city initiated.

11:43 ↗ We received none from the public and

11:45 ↗ again GMA does require that any change

11:48 ↗ to the comprehensive plan is consistent

11:50 ↗ um not only within the comprehensive

11:52 ↗ plan but also with you know the regional

11:54 ↗ and state uh planning and requirements.

12:00 ↗ Okay. So now I want to turn to the

12:03 ↗ actual proposed docket and the list of

12:06 ↗ proposals. So we do not intend you to

12:08 ↗ read this list. This is just a copy of

12:10 ↗ the docket that was uh provided to you

12:12 ↗ in your packet that is now um on the

12:14 ↗ city's website. And there are five

12:16 ↗ proposals. I'm going to go ahead and go

12:18 ↗ through each of the proposals uh to give

12:21 ↗ you an understanding of uh what changes

12:24 ↗ are identified. So this first proposal

12:28 ↗ um talks about um land use designations

12:31 ↗ and the goal of these proposals are to

12:34 ↗ ensure that land use designations are

12:37 ↗ consistent not only within the

12:38 ↗ comprehensive plan but also with the

12:40 ↗ development regulations that the city

12:41 ↗ has. And I'm going to go ahead and just

12:44 ↗ go to this next slide which is the land

12:46 ↗ use map that is in the comprehensive

12:47 ↗ plan. Um that also shows that there are

12:51 ↗ nine land use designations. Hard to

12:53 ↗ read. They're on the left. you don't I

12:54 ↗ mean it's it's really just the colors

12:56 ↗ that I'm wanting you to pay attention to

12:58 ↗ um to understand that um land use maps

13:01 ↗ are very important tools. They identify

13:04 ↗ or they illustrate the city's vision

13:05 ↗ that is in the comprehensive plan. They

13:08 ↗ talk about or they they identify where

13:10 ↗ and how the city is going to grow in

13:13 ↗ certain areas. So for example, the red

13:16 ↗ um mixeduse land use designation you can

13:19 ↗ see in this area that is the city's main

13:23 ↗ mixeduse center, the city's regional

13:25 ↗ growth center within central Isiqua

13:27 ↗ planning area. Um and the other uh eight

13:31 ↗ designations also identify the type of

13:33 ↗ growth that is anticipated in a certain

13:35 ↗ location. These land use designations

13:38 ↗ are um are important to the zoning in a

13:42 ↗ city because by state law, by the GMA,

13:45 ↗ your development regulations must

13:47 ↗ implement the comprehensive plan. And so

13:49 ↗ this is really if you are looking at a

13:51 ↗ comprehensive plan, land use map and

13:53 ↗ your zoning map, you can see how they

13:55 ↗ implement each other. So the proposals

13:58 ↗ um identified in the first docket item

14:01 ↗ are really about just strengthening uh

14:04 ↗ that consistency between the

14:07 ↗ comprehensive plan and land use

14:08 ↗ designations and the development

14:10 ↗ regulations specifically zoning.

14:12 ↗ >> So there would do you mind if I jumped

14:14 ↗ in for just one second just for a little

14:15 ↗ planning 101 and I think most of you

14:18 ↗ have heard this before but I just want

14:19 ↗ to make sure. Um so the land use

14:22 ↗ designations the nine of them that we

14:23 ↗ have we have 35 different zoning

14:26 ↗ districts. Okay. And the land use

14:28 ↗ designations themselves are like

14:30 ↗ umbrellas and each one contains so our

14:34 ↗ low density residential contains

14:37 ↗ different single family zones that we

14:38 ↗ have. So it has conservancy residential,

14:41 ↗ single family estate, single family

14:43 ↗ suburbans, uh small lot and duplex. has

14:47 ↗ all of those under there and those are

14:48 ↗ all supposed to sort of eventually meet

14:50 ↗ the purpose of these individual zones,

14:52 ↗ meet this vision of that designation. So

14:55 ↗ that's I just wanted to make sure uh

14:57 ↗ that you all knew kind of how that

14:59 ↗ worked.

14:59 ↗ >> Yeah. And that's a great segue into

15:01 ↗ going back to the slide because you can

15:03 ↗ see the table um to the right of um the

15:06 ↗ screen. And that table um was

15:10 ↗ inadvertently not included in the last

15:12 ↗ comprehensive plan amendment process.

15:14 ↗ And we wanted to reinsert it to ensure

15:17 ↗ clarity around which of those zones

15:19 ↗ implements which of the land use

15:20 ↗ designations. Additionally, part of this

15:23 ↗ amendment is to um describe and define

15:27 ↗ the land use designations. Right now,

15:30 ↗ the zoning code, which had that big

15:32 ↗ update, the title 18 update a few years

15:34 ↗ ago, um did a great job of clarifying

15:37 ↗ the purpose of each zone. So, we just

15:39 ↗ want to clarify um and provide more

15:42 ↗ policy basis for those zoning

15:44 ↗ descriptions by also having land use

15:46 ↗ descriptions at that higher kind of

15:47 ↗ policy level. So, that's really what uh

15:50 ↗ this first proposal is.

15:54 ↗ I could talk about these little

15:55 ↗ planneries things all day, so I will

15:57 ↗ stop. But um the second proposed

15:59 ↗ amendment is one that was um actually

16:02 ↗ proposed as part of the 2025 docket and

16:05 ↗ then it was removed from the docket

16:06 ↗ because it was really a big lift for

16:08 ↗ staff and there weren't the resources in

16:10 ↗ the city at the time to fully uh be able

16:12 ↗ to do the research and implement um the

16:15 ↗ changes uh envisioned. So, this proposal

16:18 ↗ would clarify the names of the

16:20 ↗ lowdensity and multi multifamily land

16:22 ↗ use and zoning designations to ensure

16:24 ↗ compliance with the state's middle

16:26 ↗ housing requirements. As Kristen shared,

16:29 ↗ you can see the lowdensity residential

16:31 ↗ land use designation is implemented by

16:33 ↗ multiple zones, many of which have

16:36 ↗ single family in the title. But because

16:39 ↗ of the middle housing amendments from a

16:40 ↗ couple of years ago that allowed not

16:42 ↗ only single family uses in these zones

16:44 ↗ but also uh duplex, multipplex and other

16:47 ↗ middle housing types. Um it is felt that

16:50 ↗ it is not uh clear uh you know for for

16:53 ↗ folks and and for the the sense of the

16:55 ↗ code um that these zones are actually

16:58 ↗ capable of handling uh single family or

17:00 ↗ middle housing uh uses. So this

17:03 ↗ amendment is taking a look at you know

17:06 ↗ what's the right way to name these land

17:07 ↗ use designations and these zones so it

17:10 ↗ makes more sense in terms of uh what is

17:12 ↗ allowed what what the zones are capable

17:14 ↗ of. So that's the research and analysis

17:15 ↗ that will uh be undertaken to implement

17:18 ↗ this proposal.

17:21 ↗ Okay. So amendment number three out of

17:24 ↗ five. Um this amendment would update the

17:28 ↗ central Isiqua regional growth center

17:30 ↗ policies as necessary. So just for some

17:33 ↗ wayf finding if you look at the map um

17:35 ↗ the uh you see isqua and the purple area

17:39 ↗ that boundary is for central Isiqua as

17:42 ↗ identified in the central Isiqua plan

17:43 ↗ and within the central Isiqua plan or

17:46 ↗ planning area in the green is this the

17:49 ↗ city's designated regional growth center

17:51 ↗ kind of the urban core. So that reg uh

17:54 ↗ regional growth center RGC um was

17:57 ↗ designated by Puget Sound Regional

17:59 ↗ Council. Um it uh is an important

18:02 ↗ designation because it allows the city

18:05 ↗ to be eligible for federal

18:07 ↗ transportation funds and for significant

18:10 ↗ investments like the light rail that is

18:12 ↗ coming to Isiqua. So um Pugettown

18:16 ↗ Regional Council PSRC um did some work

18:19 ↗ on the way to updating their vision

18:22 ↗ 2050. You may all be aware of that in

18:25 ↗ advance of the the major periodic

18:27 ↗ updates of the comprehensive plans that

18:29 ↗ were required throughout the region.

18:31 ↗ Isqua adopted uh that in 2024 along with

18:34 ↗ with many other cities in Puget Sound.

18:36 ↗ Um and as part of the um process of of

18:42 ↗ moving through that update, uh PSRC

18:46 ↗ uh revised some of the requirements for

18:48 ↗ the RGC's and now they're going through

18:51 ↗ a redesation process for the 30 existing

18:54 ↗ regional growth centers um that were

18:57 ↗ designated, you know, years ago, uh

18:59 ↗ including Isopas. Um there are some

19:02 ↗ newer RGC's that that used the new

19:05 ↗ updated uh requirements and now they

19:08 ↗ want um all of the RGC's to similarly

19:11 ↗ show that that we're going to align with

19:13 ↗ that vision from from PSRC's vision

19:15 ↗ 2050. So uh actually uh we met with some

19:18 ↗ PSRC staff and um just talked through uh

19:23 ↗ some of the changes. Um I think we noted

19:25 ↗ in your memo that what was discussed was

19:27 ↗ ensuring that the targets for how much

19:30 ↗ growth the regional growth center is

19:31 ↗ going to take align with the um

19:34 ↗ population and growth uh population and

19:35 ↗ job targets in the comprehensive plan

19:37 ↗ that were um adopted as part of the 2024

19:40 ↗ update and uh look at some other data

19:43 ↗ ensure that um what was in vision 2050

19:46 ↗ matches with um what is in the

19:48 ↗ comprehensive plan uh again that isqua

19:50 ↗ adopted. So uh that process uh uh is

19:55 ↗ upcoming in this proposal where we would

19:57 ↗ go and and do the research uh do the

20:00 ↗ math and make sure the policies and data

20:02 ↗ are working with the new uh vision 2050

20:04 ↗ framework for regional growth centers.

20:09 ↗ So number four in terms of the proposed

20:12 ↗ amendments um were updates identified by

20:15 ↗ park staff um to ensure alignment with

20:18 ↗ the 2024 park system plan update. Um one

20:22 ↗ of the proposed changes is to change all

20:25 ↗ the references in the comprehensive plan

20:27 ↗ from parks plan or whatever it is to the

20:29 ↗ park system plan. So there are some just

20:31 ↗ nomenclature changes uh that they want

20:33 ↗ to get uh uh to be consistent across

20:36 ↗ documents. Um, another is, um, uh, to

20:41 ↗ change the name of the green necklace,

20:43 ↗ uh, park and open space concept from the

20:46 ↗ Isqua central plan to the Creeks to

20:49 ↗ Peaks citywide, um, trail, uh, name that

20:54 ↗ was adopted through that park system

20:56 ↗ plan update. Um and lastly uh well the

20:59 ↗ one that I can recall anyway is uh

21:01 ↗ ensuring that the level of service

21:03 ↗ standards for parks facilities um is

21:07 ↗ consistent across um the parks plan and

21:09 ↗ the comprehensive plan and there may be

21:11 ↗ others that Kristen do you want to

21:13 ↗ share?

21:13 ↗ >> You know I was just going to clarify

21:14 ↗ that one a little bit. Right now uh

21:16 ↗ level of service for parks is measured

21:18 ↗ on quantity and number of people you

21:20 ↗ know per number of parks per number of

21:22 ↗ people and the parks department has

21:25 ↗ changed that in their park system plan

21:27 ↗ to do quality over in quality of the

21:31 ↗ parks rather than quantity. So we're

21:33 ↗ going to find out a little bit more

21:34 ↗ about that as well. Yeah.

21:38 ↗ Thank you.

21:40 ↗ Okay. The uh final proposal on the

21:42 ↗ docket is um sort of a placeholder for

21:46 ↗ potential amendments identified through

21:48 ↗ this year's ISUA climate action plan

21:51 ↗ update process, the IAAP. I know um

21:55 ↗ Stacy uh the sustainability manager was

21:57 ↗ here uh maybe in the November meeting or

21:59 ↗ before that to share uh what was

22:01 ↗ happening with the IAAP update and we've

22:03 ↗ been in close contact in case any of the

22:06 ↗ proposals in that strategic functional

22:07 ↗ plan uh would ne necessitate any changes

22:10 ↗ to policy. So it's kind of this

22:12 ↗ iterative process and we will let you

22:13 ↗ know um if anything emerges from that

22:15 ↗ process. So that was an overview of the

22:18 ↗ five proposals on the docket again all

22:20 ↗ city initiated. Um now I will talk

22:23 ↗ through some dates, a few more logistics

22:25 ↗ and then open the floor to the

22:26 ↗ commission. So um immediate next steps

22:29 ↗ as I mentioned at your next meeting on

22:30 ↗ January 22nd there will be a public

22:32 ↗ hearing. We will ask the commission for

22:34 ↗ their recommendation on the proposals.

22:36 ↗ Uh the PTE review will be on February

22:39 ↗ 3rd. They will also provide a

22:41 ↗ recommendation to full counsel and full

22:44 ↗ counsel um is set to act uh to finalize

22:47 ↗ the docket of proposals for further

22:49 ↗ consideration on February 23rd.

22:52 ↗ So here's that consideration slide again

22:56 ↗ um just to help you prepare for

22:58 ↗ discussion um of the proposals I just

23:01 ↗ shared with you. Um are is there

23:03 ↗ anything you thought was not relevant or

23:05 ↗ necessary? Um any refinements? again

23:08 ↗ having discussion now thinking through

23:10 ↗ for the recommendation that we will ask

23:11 ↗ of you at your next meeting uh is the

23:14 ↗ intent of uh bringing up that slide. Um

23:17 ↗ and a reminder in terms of your

23:19 ↗ recommendation

23:20 ↗ um on January 22nd uh the recommendation

23:25 ↗ uh will be regarding not the final

23:29 ↗ amendment that's done but uh regarding a

23:32 ↗ proposal to be examined throughout the

23:34 ↗ process um over the next several months.

23:37 ↗ Um it is not a re recommendation again

23:39 ↗ regarding the amendment themselves and

23:42 ↗ uh you can of course recommend to keep

23:44 ↗ things as is delete things um suggest

23:47 ↗ moving them to another year uh or adding

23:49 ↗ to any proposals.

23:53 ↗ So this is basically the last slide. I'm

23:56 ↗ just going to leave it up as you um have

23:59 ↗ any questions or discussion uh that

24:01 ↗ you'd like to have on the presentation.

24:05 ↗ Well, thank you, Planner Kaney. That was

24:07 ↗ great. Wonderful presentation.

24:10 ↗ Okay, let's open it up for the

24:12 ↗ commissioners. And yes, I see you,

24:14 ↗ Commissioner Crass as well. So, just

24:15 ↗ give me a a hand if you do have anything

24:18 ↗ to say. Uh, Commissioner Adair, is that

24:20 ↗ a microphone that's on? Please go ahead.

24:22 ↗ >> Yeah. Hi, just a followup question.

24:24 ↗ Could you repeat the Puget Sound

24:27 ↗ Regional Council information again for

24:29 ↗ me because it kind of went by fast.

24:33 ↗ Let me hit the right button. Yes, of

24:34 ↗ course. Um, so, uh, Pugettown Regional

24:39 ↗ Council designated, uh, regional growth

24:41 ↗ centers, um, over a decade ago. Um, and

24:46 ↗ the purpose of the regional growth

24:47 ↗ center was to identify locations across

24:49 ↗ the Puget Sound region that would take

24:51 ↗ the most growth. um that uh

24:54 ↗ acknowledging that they would take the

24:55 ↗ most growth uh the PSRC opens up those

24:58 ↗ areas for um certain um funding that

25:02 ↗ they get through the federal government

25:04 ↗ for transportation and other things. Um

25:06 ↗ and also they identify a um preferred

25:11 ↗ development pattern around um clustering

25:14 ↗ uh population supporting them with

25:16 ↗ walkable transit oriented um

25:20 ↗ transportation modes. Um the focus of

25:23 ↗ the vision 2050 update was to ensure

25:25 ↗ equitable uh equity was a a

25:30 ↗ considered thing in the policies in

25:32 ↗ different cities. And as part of that

25:34 ↗ designation process, um cities back in

25:38 ↗ the day were required to show yes, we

25:39 ↗ meet your requirements for how big we

25:41 ↗ are or what kind of development uh

25:45 ↗ regulations we have for walkable,

25:47 ↗ pedestrian oriented, transit oriented

25:49 ↗ development, etc. So in 2018, PS PSRC

25:53 ↗ updated the RGC framework because

25:55 ↗ they've been getting a lot of petitions

25:57 ↗ from other cities to uh be part of uh

26:00 ↗ the RGC uh funding process and they

26:03 ↗ wanted to be eligible and there were

26:04 ↗ there was a lot of growth and in these

26:06 ↗ centers across the region. Um and then

26:09 ↗ in vision 2050 um additional policies

26:12 ↗ were uh developed and right now uh PSRC

26:17 ↗ is going to all of the um 30 RGC's that

26:20 ↗ that were the initial uh initially

26:23 ↗ allowed and saying okay we we need you

26:25 ↗ to make sure that um you meet the new

26:28 ↗ requirements. A lot of work in Isqua and

26:31 ↗ other places was done in our periodic

26:33 ↗ updates, our major comprehensive plan

26:35 ↗ updates, but there are some additional

26:37 ↗ things that PSRC is meeting with all the

26:39 ↗ cities about to to make sure that um the

26:43 ↗ designation is appropriate. So, we're in

26:45 ↗ that process right now.

26:48 ↗ >> You're welcome.

26:50 ↗ >> Thank you, Commissioner Dair. Um any

26:53 ↗ other comments for planner Keaney?

26:58 ↗ I just had a quick uh point of

26:59 ↗ clarification. You mentioned adding to

27:02 ↗ the amendments. I didn't think we could

27:03 ↗ do that. I thought we could either

27:06 ↗ recommend them or, you know, possibly

27:09 ↗ ask for something to be taken out, but I

27:11 ↗ thought I heard you mention we could add

27:12 ↗ and I didn't think that we could do

27:14 ↗ that.

27:15 ↗ >> I think um [clears throat] your

27:18 ↗ recommendation could request additions

27:21 ↗ at this point after the final docket is

27:23 ↗ established and adopted by council.

27:26 ↗ Those are the proposals.

27:27 ↗ >> Okay.

27:28 ↗ >> That's my understanding of it. Kristen,

27:30 ↗ do you

27:30 ↗ >> That's my understanding as well. Yes.

27:33 ↗ >> So, when you say council adoption,

27:35 ↗ you're talking about February, not later

27:37 ↗ in the year.

27:38 ↗ >> That's right.

27:38 ↗ >> Okay.

27:39 ↗ >> The final docket adoption. Thank you for

27:41 ↗ that.

27:43 ↗ >> Thank you. That was really it for me.

27:45 ↗ Commissioner Crass, anything you'd like

27:47 ↗ to add?

27:50 ↗ >> I'm good. Thanks.

27:52 ↗ >> Okay. Hope you're feeling better.

27:55 ↗ Uh, anybody else going once, going

27:58 ↗ twice?

28:01 ↗ Okay, unscathed. Uh, thank you, Planner

28:04 ↗ Kaney. Appreciate the presentation. That

28:06 ↗ was great. And, uh, also looking at it

28:09 ↗ holistically, it's helpful for

28:10 ↗ everybody.

28:12 ↗ All right.

28:18 ↗ Well, it's going to be a quick meeting.

28:21 ↗ Uh, we're going to move on to reports

28:23 ↗ this evening and we are looking for city

28:25 ↗ council updates from either Kate or

28:27 ↗ Kristen.

28:29 ↗ >> I only have one. It's a little quiet at

28:32 ↗ the end of the year, but on I think we

28:34 ↗ told you back in September, we went to

28:37 ↗ city council. They asked us to go and

28:39 ↗ talk with them to have them prioritize

28:42 ↗ work program for us uh especially

28:45 ↗ regarding housing in this year. But then

28:48 ↗ there was an election. So, we are going

28:52 ↗ to go back to city council now on March

28:55 ↗ 9th. And one of the reasons that we

28:57 ↗ haven't done the calendar yet is because

28:59 ↗ we're not fully sure about what our work

29:00 ↗ program is. So, we're going to go back

29:03 ↗ to city council on March 9th to find my

29:07 ↗ to, you know, talk about our priorities

29:09 ↗ and then we will get that calendar to

29:11 ↗ you. But, you might want to tune in that

29:12 ↗ night and just see what the discussion

29:15 ↗ looks like and see what you're in for.

29:17 ↗ But I do think there will be fi quite a

29:19 ↗ few code amendments coming your way.

29:23 ↗ >> We love code.

29:26 ↗ >> So what's that mean till March?

29:29 ↗ >> We do have other So those are for the

29:31 ↗ bigger amendments. We do have other

29:33 ↗ smaller amendments that are coming to

29:35 ↗ you in the meantime.

29:37 ↗ >> Okay. No time off.

29:40 ↗ >> No.

29:40 ↗ >> Good.

29:42 ↗ >> Good. Hopefully everybody had plenty of

29:44 ↗ time off over the holidays.

29:46 ↗ All right. Thank you, Kristen. Um, any

29:49 ↗ other updates as far as the city? I know

29:51 ↗ we have a new administration. Anything

29:53 ↗ else?

29:54 ↗ >> Uh, new administration. So, that's

29:56 ↗ that's been fun. Um, truly it has. Um,

30:00 ↗ let's see. Yes. I just found out

30:03 ↗ typically applications for different

30:05 ↗ boards and commissions don't go out

30:06 ↗ until February this year. They're going

30:08 ↗ to go out January 16th. So, keep your

30:11 ↗ eyes open for those applications.

30:14 ↗ Um

30:16 ↗ Stacy will be coming back to talk to you

30:19 ↗ Stacy Vine McKinstry on the IAAP

30:23 ↗ on in on February 26th

30:26 ↗ and then

30:29 ↗ Thomas Valdz is also going to come back

30:32 ↗ to you February or March to talk about

30:34 ↗ light rail. We have criteria a set of

30:36 ↗ criteria that has been established that

30:38 ↗ he wants to talk with you all about.

30:40 ↗ He's making the rounds. I have a

30:41 ↗ question for you too because we are

30:43 ↗ going to be talking so much about

30:45 ↗ housing this year.

30:47 ↗ I don't know how many of you have

30:49 ↗ actually received the housing 101 class

30:52 ↗ and would you all be interested in

30:54 ↗ having a housing 101? Okay, that's a

30:57 ↗ unanimous. All right, so we will plan on

31:00 ↗ doing that in January, February. Great

31:05 ↗ for you. Okay, great. That's all I have.

31:08 ↗ Thank you. Okay, thank you.

31:13 ↗ Moving along to end this evening.

31:16 ↗ Finally, any other business or

31:18 ↗ announcements

31:20 ↗ from our commissioners, from staff,

31:24 ↗ anything? Any crazy holiday stories?

31:26 ↗ Nothing. Oh, Commissioner Dare has one.

31:29 ↗ Okay, please.

31:30 ↗ at the bottom of my hill. I don't know

31:32 ↗ if you guys heard me say this, a mine

31:34 ↗ shaft exploded from all the rain and it

31:36 ↗ created a massive sinkhole in my

31:38 ↗ neighbor's yard. It was really crazy.

31:40 ↗ And now we have the federal engineers

31:44 ↗ coming in. So that's an adventure.

31:47 ↗ And now I'm also panicked. I'm like, is

31:49 ↗ there a mine under my home? And I don't

31:51 ↗ know.

31:53 ↗ But that's all. That was my crazy story.

31:56 ↗ >> That is pretty crazy.

32:02 ↗ Huh. Wow.

32:03 ↗ >> Luckily, their koiish survived because

32:05 ↗ it went through their koi pond. So, if

32:07 ↗ you're wondering, everything was okay

32:08 ↗ with the fish.

32:11 ↗ >> Wow.

32:14 ↗ >> Wow. Um, I guess I just have one

32:16 ↗ question. How is the city doing as far

32:18 ↗ as cleanup from the the excessive amount

32:21 ↗ of rain? I know Newport was washed out.

32:24 ↗ The major damage to the city or

32:26 ↗ infrastructure.

32:27 ↗ >> No, I know. salmon. I I remember reading

32:29 ↗ about that an article about just their

32:31 ↗ concern with all that runoff and water.

32:35 ↗ >> And then Gibson Hall, which is one of

32:37 ↗ our community spaces that we use. I know

32:39 ↗ that it flooded a bit. So, there's going

32:42 ↗ to have to be some repair work there.

32:43 ↗ Otherwise, I haven't heard of anything.

32:45 ↗ Have you heard of anything, Kate? Yeah,

32:48 ↗ they did. They just renovated that so

32:50 ↗ that we could open and use it for the

32:51 ↗ community. I don't think it's going to

32:52 ↗ be a lot of work, but there was some

32:54 ↗ damage done.

32:57 ↗ an excessive amount of

33:00 ↗ just really hasn't stopped. Okay. Well,

33:02 ↗ thank you for the crazy story. Thank you

33:04 ↗ for the update. Um, okay. Going once,

33:07 ↗ going twice. Any anything else? Anything

33:09 ↗ for the good of the order?

33:12 ↗ All right. Well, we will adjourn this

33:14 ↗ meeting of the planning policy

33:15 ↗ commission at 7:05 p.m. Thank 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)

Kate Kaehny, Principal Planner Christen Leeson, Planning Manager 2. Approval of Minutes a) Minutes of November 13, 2025 Commissioner Oliner stated that on page three in the third paragraph, a typo exists in the line, …that the city if interested. Leeson replied that the word would be changed to is. With no other changes or comments, the Minutes were approved. 3

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.

With no other changes or comments, the Minutes were approved.
Kaehny replied that recommendations could be asked for at this point, but that once the final docket is established and adopted by Council no further changes can occur.