Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

Good evening. I would like to welcome everyone to tonight's meeting. It is 01/26/2026, and the time is now 06:00. This meeting will come to order. Tanya, will you please call the roll?

Yes. Ali Shasti?

Here.

Ben Reed? Here. Bonnie Williams? Brian Kesterson?

Here.

Justice Phelps may be joining. Oh, he has joined. Sandra Pereira Reynolds? Here. Todd Ollofesto is excused. For the record, remote attendance for board member Justice Phelps has been approved for this meeting.

Thank you. Are there any added items or changes to the agenda from staff?

Good evening. Happy New Year. No changes. I did want to highlight just because we do have a new board member and we do have some members in viewing area. If you see us raising these tiny houses, it is to indicate that one of the land use and planning board members wants to talk. It also could mean I have a response or Justice, is joining us virtually. I also play double duty, Tanya and I monitor, to know if he would like to provide comment as well. So just in case anyone's wondering what's happening when you see these houses going up, it's not secret messages. It's just to notify our chair that we would like to speak.

Excellent. Thank you. The minutes from the previous meeting have been presented to the board. I call for a motion to approve the minutes of 12/08/2025, as presented.

This is Sandra Pineda Reynolds. I move to approve the minutes as presented.

This is Ali Shansey. I second.

Is there any discussion? I call for a vote to approve the minutes. All in favor say aye.

Aye. Aye.

Those against say nay. The vote is approved one, two, three, four, five, six, six to zero. Tonight we are holding a land use and planning board meeting in which staff will give presentations on recode Kent phase two and three critical areas ordinance update and the LUPB 101 training. If there are no objections from the board members at this time, we are ready for the presentation on Recode Kent Phase II and III update. Staff, you may begin.

As you all know, Reco Kent is a multiphase project that updates the Kent City, City Of Kent housing code permitting processes and development standards to better align with our community goals, our 2044 comprehensive plan, and of course, state law. So jumping into our agenda tonight, we all have a phase one recap. Going into phase two, what we've done and what is remaining for the closeout of phase two, and then jumping into what's next with phase three. So moving on to phase one. So we completed phase one last year, 06/30/2025 and we completed that with ordinance or we adopted it with ordinance four five one seven, and that adopted eight different state laws, most notably our middle housing laws.

That included some zone consolidation. We created a site plan permitting process a bunch of other things that you can see here on your screen. So we knew this would be a big overhaul for not only our team, but also the community as well. So we created a bunch of resources or a couple resources to help guide the community. So we have our middle housing quick guide.

So the middle housing quick quick guide essentially let our community know what middle housing is and how to go about building middle housing in the city Of Kent. We also created an interactive mapping tool. So this tool showed our new zoning districts which we created from the consolidation. It also showed our walk sheds around major transit so people knew how many units they could connect or have connected and how much parking they may need or may not need. It also shows urban separators, utility service areas and infrastructure exemption locations, which is a new addition to this mapping tool.

So moving on to phase two. So the first two, we have adopted already. So they're completed. So last year, November 18, we adopted ordinance four five two nine. So that was adopting co living regulations and updating our communal residences and our Kent City code.

In December 9, we adopted ordinance four five three zero, which adopted an exemption for infrastructure improvements for residential development with four fewer units in the zones NRL, NRS, and NR 2. So moving forward with the rest of phase two, we intend to have three, four, and five adopted by spring twenty twenty six. So our goals for 2026 and to conclude phase two are creating strategies to balance out new middle housing with historic preservation goals, updates to incorporate our Mill Creek Historic District into the Kent City code. We also have plans to amend our general building design regulations or guidelines for compliance with house bill twelve ninety three, and some revisions to our c c and CCMU zones to provide more housing options, in particular more housing or more homeownership options. Moving on to State House Bill fifteen seventy six.

So this is a bill that was recently adopted and essentially it states that cities must adopt regulations that prohibit the designation of a property as a historic landmark outside of a historic district if the property is less than 40 years old. If the designation would restrict the use of the property and if the property is less than a 125 years old and has not given consent. So we currently have an ILA or inter local agreement with King County which already allows for the top bullet, so the less than 40 years old. So what would be new would be the highlighted portion here. So that would be new code that we would adopt into the Kent City code, and we do plan to have that adopted relatively soon.

So this leads me into our Mill Creek Historic District. So during phase one, we had some community concern regarding the litany of housing regulations that we adopted and preserving the historic character of this neighborhood. We weren't able to get to it in phase one, but we promised we'd get to it in a later phase. So here we are trying to codify and formally recognize our Mill Creek Historic District and language around the regulations for that district. I should note this district isn't new.

It was approved for landmark designation in 2013 or I'm sorry, landmark designation nomination in 2013 and it was adopted by King County shortly after. It currently resides in our N R 2 zone, so it's been there for a while. We're just formally adopting code that provides language around the preservation of the historic buildings and property within this area. And next another part of our phase two revolves around design guidelines, in particular house bill twelve ninety three. So this is a bill that was adopted in 2023 and essentially states that we have to have clear and ascertainable guidelines for design review, and those guidelines should not should not restrict or reduce bulk height, density, or scale than what's otherwise allowed in the applicable zone.

So we completed a lot of design updates during our phase one, making sure we had those clear and ascertainable guidelines for residential development with six or fewer units. However, for phase three, which would focus on larger scale development and looking at our design our other design guideline booklets, We put out a survey. We also reviewed our design guidelines. And in that survey that we sent out to developers, they didn't have much pushback on our design guidelines, so they didn't find much issue or any issue rather with our design guidelines. However, we do want to essentially or eventually, I'm sorry, do a comprehensive update of our design guidelines.

So we plan to provide a disclaimer for our design guidelines currently that says, you know, we don't intend to hinder height, book, or scale. And if that does happen inadvertently, there will be a director's discretion on those guidelines. So this is just a fix for right now. We do plan to come back and do a whole a whole and comprehensive update to our design guidelines and standardizing them across the board. And we're looking to do that, grand scale update. We'll do our bits and quarter plan. But as far as this disclaimer that we'll add, we are hoping to have that adopted pretty soon as well.

I think we had a question.

Before moving off the historic district it's a little hard to tell from the map. Is the Kent Historical Society building inside the historical district?

Yes.

Okay.

Deja, do you want to just give a little bit of a preview of who we've engaged with on that code section for the historic district just to let Landis and Planning Board know that we have been discussing this with relevant parties?

Yeah. So we talked to some community members, some of the boards and members of the actual Mill Creek Historic District Board. We met with them in one of their meetings and we actually showed them our draft code and they were pretty okay with it or they were okay with it rather. They really just wanted to formalize that this area is here and that there are regulations that need to be abide by.

And that was with we did meet with the Kent Historic Society. So that was we met with that board and as well as the original commenter who happens to be in the audience today, Mr. Johnson. And he has been helping to circulate it as well. And so this is not the official briefing on the proposed code changes, but we have been doing work on that as well as work with King County to make sure that we're in alignment.

So lastly, phase two in our closeout, we plan to update our community commercial zone. So that would be our CC and our CCMU, which is community commercial mixed use. So if you look on your screen here, this area highlighted in red is where a lot of our community commercial and community commercial mixed use sits or resides. It also houses our Benson Corridor, so in a hundred and eighth and a hundred and fourth. So we're looking to increase homeownership or housing options in this area, in particular, housing such as townhomes.

So in our comp plan, this is designated or there's a vision for this to be mixed use. It's also an activity center and includes a county designated growth center. So these updates will help push that. So currently, in our code, there are barriers that hinder homeownership and residential development in this area. These things could be site coverage.

So site coverage is site coverage is, sorry, where the building lays on the lot. So the amount of space that the building lay has on that lot. So with our current code, site coverage essentially creates development that has a lot of surface parking, which we don't necessarily want. There's also high restrictions. At a certain point, you can't build units, so it limits the amount of units you can have or housing development you can have.

And there are also commercial requirements, which we find that they often cannot lease out, so it kinda sits empty. So people don't wanna build homes in this area. So moving on to some examples and some discussion with you all regarding the updates to CC and CC and U and why we actually wanna go about doing this. So if you look at the screen here, this is a housing development that's in our general commercial zone. So we're just using this as an example, but it's in our general commercial zone and it's office central.

It sits behind a car dealership. And currently, code states that in order to do this residential development, you have to have at least 5% of the gross square area via commercial use. So there actually is a commercial use. They they built their commercial use, and it sits right here on Nova Lane, but it's empty. Many people don't go out there for for anything.

No one wants to rent it because it's it's kinda off of commercial and there's no real purpose for commercial there. So this is just a consistent issue we're having with a lot of our mixed use developments and a concern of ours when it comes to CC the CC zone. Like I said, we wanna have that mixed use vision for the area and we just don't see it happen if if we're having these requirements where there's empty space sitting. Another consequence of our our legacy code here is wrapped parking in unfriendly pedestrian environment. So this is an example off of Alderwood Mall Boulevard.

It's in Lynnwood, but it shows you what we don't want in these areas that we want to be robust and vibrant with housing and economic vitality. So you can see here there's some parking wrapped here, and then where pedestrians are supposed to walk. It's kinda just not very appealing. There's no activation, no eyes on the street. So it doesn't really promote a pedestrian environment.

So moving on to some examples and some available land that's actually in Kent. So this area is our top food sites or the old top food sites. It's in our CC zone and it sits next to a Target and some other commercial spaces. Currently, Co says if someone wants to build residential here, at least 25% of the gross for area has to be commercial. So I wanna open up some discussion here about you all's thoughts and opinions around this because considering where the lot is, what's around the lot, would you all in in your opinion, would you consider commercial here?

Would you want commercial here? Why or why not? And would there be an instance where you all will be comfortable with commercial not being required? So I want to open up the floor for some discussion here. Again, don't have any anything codified. I'm still looking at changes, but I do want to open it up to see thoughts and opinions on this.

So clarifying question before I answer. I'm assuming in this example one that there is I mean, obviously, is a bunch of commercial uses around the building already. And it would I guess I'm wondering, is there an option that it be less than the 25% but What still I'm getting at is, I think it makes sense to have, like, maybe a larger development in this area. It's super walkable. Like, there's a Target right there.

There's I mean, it would just be really easy, let's say, for, like, a young professional to live there. But having 25% of it, essentially adding another really large store in an area where there's already a Target and a Home Depot doesn't make a ton of sense to me. But it would be cool if there was like a smaller, maybe one or two commercial spots. So I guess that's kind of what I'm getting at. Reduce the percentage maybe so that we're not requiring a larger commercial use, but maybe bring a couple of smaller, like more lifestyle type businesses to the area.

So currently, Co does not have It's not a reduction, sorry. This is actually the minimum. So if you want to see residential, it would have to be 25% of your gross square area. It has to be commercial. We could reduce it, that's an option.

Right.

A little bit of extra context on here, Deja, you're doing a great job setting the table here. This is a very influx situation in that the state right now is looking at a legislative bill that would remove city's ability to require any ground floor commercial. And we are, as a city, have taken the stance that says there's some areas where it makes sense to have that, and then there's other areas. And we, as staff, would say this is an example where there's a lot of commercial in between where that potential development for housing could go and what else is around. So, are little there's a little coffee shop, there's Ross, there's a tax preparation, a Taekwondo, there's a ton of other businesses in that parking or in that structure of that strip mall.

And so, we're saying, that probably doesn't make sense. The previous example that Deja showed with pros also probably doesn't make sense. The only front that they have along the roadway or where pedestrians would be walking by is just their driveway. So, we're saying, are there contexts where we say, you know, in these situations, it may not make sense to have the ground floor commercial if there's already abundant commercial nearby. Whereas, in other sense, we may want to retain that requirement, and so we're speaking now specifically along the southern part of that Benson corridor area that we're talking.

We will be doing a broader Benson plan, so this is an interim conversation that we want to pose of, are there some limitations we could remove in the interim? So, that's kind of where we're here to hear your opinions on that before we develop any code changes or fixes. The argument against why we don't want commercial is one, sometimes it makes sense, sometimes it doesn't. But, if it doesn't make sense, what happens is that Ground Floor commercial isn't leased, and then it ends up sitting, and what happens is the residents in that building, someone has to pay to cover the cost of that. So, it means that it drives rent prices up.

In some instances, though, we do want ground floor commercial in areas where we may have services or providers that are really only open from eight to five, where we would want things to be open later, like our downtown area would make sense where we would say, no, ground floor commercial is more of a priority in some of these areas for having eyes on the street, and a bunch of other reasons that are good planning principles that make vibrant communities. But in this area, there's already a lot of things that are happening around the clock. And so, that's kind of the balance that we're trying to strike here, and want to ask your opinion on.

Oh, go ahead.

I guess I would echo that in that I see that our downtown area now, where in some of the newer developed buildings, there is some allocated commercial space that's unoccupied today, but I could see in the future as the downtown corridor continues to grow, that becomes vital real estate for services that may not be as accessible. But I think that there should be on the outlying areas, such as the targets up on the hill there, where we would adjust the requirements because there is enough commercial businesses in the area that it warrants having a different requirement.

So just so that I'm clear here, the concern here is that the top food thing that's right at the right where that pin has dropped has been empty for a long time, or it's beginning to be filled or partially filled now.

Right. So what we're showing you as your examples, none of these are current development proposals. So no one is coming to us and saying, we want to build housing here right now, Got the commercial requirement. But, one of the factors that we have, as we're looking back, said is there's a lot of complications with this site with underwriting easements and other things as well, other things that we as a city don't control. But, one of the complications, we were approached by many housing developers, but they said having that commercial requirement could be very difficult, and they didn't want to build commercial uses that they weren't sure they could lease up.

And so, we're saying, in some of these instances, Deja is going show a second slide in a minute, would it make sense to revise that 25% requirement? It could be a reduction. Other things could be it could also be we're coming to you from here's the math, here's what we're hearing from our economic development team and our planners. We're asking you all, is it worth us looking at and considering this and coming up with some solutions? I think we can come forward with some as well based on but we want to before we do more code work, and we want to make sure we're talking with you all. And this will be a small strategic update that we plan on doing as part of phase two, so relatively quickly. And then, when we do the broader study, we'll have more opportunities to come back to it.

So, in that case, my answer changes. Yes, I do think it's a good idea to look into the possibility of just completely doing away with the commercial requirement. But my question is, given what Kristen said about there being some potential legislation coming down the road, do you think that it's going to be legal for the city to be able to like, within the constraints of state law, do you think we'll be able to to have that flexibility, that discretion to say, like, in some the in these areas, it's required. In other areas, it's not required.

Think you may lean on Kristen for legislation around that one. I'm not too sure. I think maybe, but

The conversations are evolving rapidly. So, I would say, if we think it's worth lessening the requirement, we should still consider that, or removing the requirement, and then we can cross the median legislative requirements that are new, as we need to. I don't think this would be for waste.

Okay. Thank you.

Is there a way to tie it to some sort of like metric that scales with growth of population? Is there a way to say like, okay, for new zoning where foot traffic measured foot traffic over x amount of time was some way to capture like that sort of like evolving as a neighborhood scales up. We don't necessarily have to adjust the code. It can scale with the code as population increases or the demands of the neighborhood change?

I think that's something we could do when we do our Benton Quarter plan because this would be like a quick fix. I don't think it's a bad idea. I think it would be helpful to have some type of varying way to go about doing this, but I think it's something we can look at consultants with doing or to do.

We want to incentivize new housing, right? Like that's the big push. So I'm all for anything that makes that more viable.

I have a small house, so it's hard to see. That's okay.

But no less important than the total need. So

typically, when you talk about mix commercial, you're talking about large developments, not the small area we're talking about. So my suggestion would be instead of having a fixed percentage like 25%, 30% without knowing what is the future for that site, we can assign a percentage and then ask the developer to do a feasibility study to see if the property is good for what kind of commercial, any commercial and stay within the range and director discretion to change that. Same as you do traffic impact analysis for roadway improvement, same thing. If it's a good fit for restaurants or daycare or what kind of commercial and what size, what percentage?

You're saying have a fixed percentage and then a

lot A of percentage. And so after feasibility study provided by the developer, based on that, you can decide, review

Allowing to go in or out of that?

Correct. Correct. That's a suggestion.

It looks like Justice has his hand raised as well.

I don't have a virtual house. We need to figure that out, Jason. But I think I like Ben's idea. I'm a little cautious about having a developer do a feasibility study on that, partly because that'll push development away. Developers developers are there to build. They're not there to do feasibility studies, and it would really scare me on saying to a developer, you need to do this before we tell you what kind of percentage you're gonna get. If we block development, we're blocking the future of Kent. And that's not something I don't think any of us really want.

Well, actually, they usually do a feasibility study before even to purchase the property. A good developer will not buy the property without knowing what it's good for. So, it's yeah, it's not unusual. It's not a burden.

These are really good points, and I hear concerns also of I hear that a developer is going to be running numbers if they're if they want to make money, they will be figuring out how to run the numbers to assess profit and loss. I also hear the concerns about uncertainty added in and the extra complications. Justice, I don't know where to look to address you. I'm sorry. I'm meaning to address this. But think Deja and I can gather the values of both of those comments when we come back to you with some ideas. Think

In fact, actually, that's a good point. So you can have a fixed number then instead of a range of number and say, okay, if you don't agree with this fixed number, do a feasibility study and prove to us that 30% is too high. Maybe you should have 15%.

I'm just saying that we need a feasibility study to a builder. Yes. They're doing their homework. They're knowing what they're supposed to look at. But builders then asking and saying to the city, oh, please, city of Kent, please approve this, and we give director director discretion, we're still there's still uncertainty with that developer. And if I'm a developer and city of Kent's gonna have this requirement, but the city of Renton's not, I'm gonna go to the City Of Renton. I'm not gonna try to stay here.

So, kind of a little concern here. So the the real issue here is what proportion of the building has to be, devoted to commercial use?

We're asking, does a commercial requirement make sense along Benson, given the existing conditions and the desire to see more housing, knowing that this can be an added cost to housing.

Yeah, and the the one

The exact percent I would worry less about, think that's something that

staff Yeah, so, can does it does it actually make sense? And, I will throw in the caveat that if your desire is to move to a more walkable community, it is that integration of commercial spaces and residential spaces that's going to make that work. It is how much you know, I kinda I kinda come back to sort of a, you know, is it bigger than a bread box, but you know, what proportion of the of the domiciles in the city can be feasibly lived in without a car? And so, know, there but there is a transition issue that's that's real, is that that's not the way people live today and so they're looking for a house there or for a domicile that fits how they live today and this ain't it, You know, but if you wanna get to where you wanna be tomorrow, somehow you you know, it's like there's an there's an issue of how do you push that noodle uphill to get to where you wanna be.

Site 2.

Yeah. So I do have another site. This one's a little bit different. It's on the Northern Benson Corridor or Northern part of the Benson Corridor. It's about two and half acres and it encompasses, let's just say everything except for that green area at the top, so it's behind the UPS or USPS, sorry. And again, code says at least 25% must be permitted for commercial use if it is a residential development. So again, getting your all's opinion on this. This one I can never get this thing right. So it does front two fortieth, so that's a major arterial. But here, this corner isn't as major as two hundred fortieth here.

So again, would you still require commercial? Would there be any changes? Would you require just on the front here of 240th? Keep in mind, there is also commercial here. On that left side, you have Grocery Outlet, Taco Bell, things like that. So it's another site to consider when thinking about this commercial requirement.

So same question, just trying to get your sense of this one has a little bit more prominent streets.

I think we're really getting down to a site by site thing. If it were me and I was looking at example site two, I'd say if I was a person living here, it's not as nice to walk from this site to the commercial that's on the left side of that image because I'd be walking past the alley in the back, etcetera, whereas that wouldn't be the case in example one. So in this one I would say maybe like that could be a good idea because it's not as pretty of a walk. I agree though that there is commercial in the area, and so it probably wouldn't be a necessity to have it there in order to fill the apartments and still have kind of a potentially walkable area.

Ali, I'm sorry.

I'm curious, how is the access to the site in and out? Is it easy access?

Mean it could be. These are all hypothetical situations.

Okay, so there is no access now. It's gonna be a proposed access?

Yeah, whatever they propose. If a residential development comes into this lot, they would propose access. Looks like currently there is access off of both streets.

Okay.

So I would assume it would probably be similar unless public works or engineering says something different. Any other questions, comments, concerns? Bonnie?

Can I ask, are there generally best practices that you guys are observing in adjacent cities that we should could look to or that you guys have assessed against what the CFKIT currently has in place?

These are all new. We haven't assessed anything quite yet. We can and we will, but as of right now, no. At least for me were you about to say something, Kristen?

This is a hot topic in the planning world. So there's a lot of thoughts on it right now. My LinkedIn is filled with different thought pieces from developers to nonprofit housing builders to planners to traffic engineers on all of this. So, there's not a shining example of this is the right way, and part of it is every community is slightly different. Our sense and our take was, we know that there's impediments to housing in this area.

There's not really impediments to the commercial use. And so, if for the next year, two years, until we get some of the Benson Corridor going, what would happen if we tried something in this area to see and to allow more housing to come and allow. Especially, one of the things that showed up on Benson when we did the comp plan was the opportunity for townhomes, And so, or live work lofts within townhomes where there's a maker space or some sort of flexible space in the front part. And so, that's where, right now, we're saying, okay, what could be some of these opportunities to see this and use it as some opportunities for groundwork for future code updates and amendments?

Okay. Yeah, I just think that whatever approach we go to, I think going back to like, you don't want a case by case basis. But, we've got commercially dense areas. You know, I think this site as well, there's a lot of commercial establishments around both site 1 and site 2, whereas maybe in the tighter, like, downtown corridor, there's less space. And so preserving the space to have commercial as a requirement makes sense versus on some of the outlying areas where there is more spread out and there's more commercial businesses.

So, to maybe move away from, like, I guess, you know, looking at this less case by case, but more so what's happening in those areas.

Looking at it more holistically.

I

guess too, like we're assuming that people will work towards whatever we want to incentivize, right? Like right now, I think the feedback I'm hearing from you, Kristen, is that the primary concern is a need for housing. So what we want to do is hopefully incentivize more we would like to put in place policies that are more inclined to incentivize housing construction and commercial at this time. So that would be my recommendation to the staff is like whatever ways as you're exploring options, would on the side of incentivizing housing development. Thank

you. I also want to say, before Dacia jumps into some preliminary ideas that we've kicked around, is that this does not preclude us from requiring design standards. So, to Sandra's point about it may not feel like a nice area to walk, or it may not feel as comfortable, there's a lot of things that we can still do with building orientation, open space, those other requirements. So it may not necessarily have commercial use on the Ground Floor, but the look and feel of the site can still be maintained to promote a more pedestrian oriented environment in that area. Thank you.

These were all helpful, and we've been kicking this around internally for a couple of weeks now trying to identify. So, Deja, do you want to go to the next slide where we said, if the goals promote housing in this, again, these CC zones, we're not talking about downtown for this. Those are very different zones. These were some opportunities that staff had identified.

Yeah. So, we have some considerations here. So, our first one is allowing four plex and higher in the CC and CCMU zone. So currently code only allows for townhomes and townhomes are only allowed if they're in the CCMU zone. So no other residential is allowed in CC.

So we're considering opening up the CC zone for denser housing by allowing multifamily townhouse or townhomes and live work units. Another option would be updating site coverage. So currently, site coverage, the amount of site coverage we have can create a development that is mostly parking. So we're looking to open up site coverage or increase site coverage so that building footprint can be larger and they're wanting to put parking underneath the unit as opposed to having lots that are completely concrete and not parking. That goes in tandem with updating our maximum height.

So like I said earlier, if you increase the height, they'll put parking underneath or hopefully we'll put parking underneath and there's less parking on the outskirts, less concrete and also more units going upward. We also have, as Kristen said about design standards and design review currently, code allows for mixed use design standards for the CC and CCMU. Those aren't as comprehensive as our multifamily design standards, so we're looking to maybe change those out and allow for multifamily design standards in this area. And that would be it for the CC and CCU updates. If you have any other considerations or things maybe we can add to this list, I'd be more than happy to.

But for right now, that's what we're thinking about, and we're hoping again to have this done pretty soon as well. It's not gonna be a a big code change, just a couple, maybe five or fewer code updates that we can quickly turn this around and kind of remote housing in this area. Now going on to what's next. So we have another phase. It's phase three.

And we did kick off phase three in October, which some of you all were able to join our joint council boards and commission meetings, so we really appreciate that. And this really helps starting to lay the groundwork for understanding what the community's priorities are when it comes to site design for middle housing and how to develop a site or site design requirements around existing challenges such as an existing home or trees. So this brings me into what we have for the rest of phase three. So our goal for phase three is to develop site design standards for all that middle housing or all those middle housing updates that we had in phase one. So this would be parking, access, landscaping, open space, all those things that come with site design.

We also wanna update our residential design standards for single family and middle housing types. We'd also like to update our unit lot subdivision. So in phase one, we capped it at nine. We've had some feedback from developers and they want it past nine. They like 10 plus lots.

So that's something we're looking into and just a reminder that a reminder that unit lot subdivision is a way to create more housing options when it comes to I'm sorry, homeownership options when it comes to middle housing. So you have a parent lot and within that parent lot you have unit lots that can be sold off and the footprint of those lots can be as big as the building footprint or however big you choose to make it. But essentially it's a way to sell off if you have an ADU or some a duplex or something behind your home, you can sell that off while still maintaining the development regulations for that zone. While looking at unit lot subdivision, we may also have to update our plan unit development standards. It's outdated and we don't need it as much.

And also with updating our unit lot subdivision to more lots, they have similar standards. So we may look into updating that as well. And lastly, we'll have some directors' interpretations. So we knew we'd break the code and we'd have some issues with our previous phases, so the directors' interpretations are providing a small band aid while we do those code amendments to incorporate what we really meant or those fixes. And lastly, we've had four pre apps and two permit applications for middle housing this year thus far, so we're really looking to keep up that momentum and encourage middle housing and housing in general in the City Of Kent. So that's all I have for you for our updates for Rico Kent.

Thank you, Deja. Members, are there any questions for staff? All right. Thank you.

Thank you all.

All right. If there are no objections from the board members at this time, we are ready for the critical area ordinance briefing. Staff, you may begin.

Hi, everyone. I'm Lindsay Walker, and I'm here to do the briefing for the critical areas ordinance. So tonight, we'll be discussing, some comments we've received from state agencies on our draft codes, how we're incorporating changes. But the big focus tonight is really gonna be about updated buffer widths for wetlands and streams, which are wildlife habitat conservation areas, as well as compensations for impacts for those critical areas. We have some slides on some more minor updates that we've discussed before, so I'll move through those pretty quickly.

So for our timeline, we got started in August earlier this year, so we are now towards the end. We are looking at adoption this quarter. So by state law, we are required to give a sixty day notice to the Department of Commerce and state agencies on our draft so that they can review that and provide comments before we go to adoption. We received 65 comments from different state agencies on our draft ordinance. We're currently working on responses to those comments.

And at the hearing, you'll have the matrix that shows all those comments and how we responded to them. So we've also got some common comments that we've seen across multiple jurisdictions. Some suggestions include, like, a monitoring program. We've seen a lot of cities get that as a comment. And it's really a separate action, so it's something we'd have to look at in the future.

Also seen them make multiple comments about setting requirements for low impact development. Some of that may not be realistic depending on soil types and unsuitable soils. And then we've seen a lot of comments about using high potential tree heights for strain buffers instead of those fixed buffers we've previously discussed. And like we discussed those times, it leads to a lot of uncertainty and added cost for applicants. Additionally, an important finding to consider is that the studies of the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife utilized for the site potential tree height recommendations don't actually account for urban environments or the difference between forested and agriculture lands.

Because of this, each local jurisdiction must make some level of policy interpretations for their stream buffers. So just quickly, a couple of new definitions we're adding to our code and then some amended definitions based on best available science. And you'll see all of those included in that code. And then general mitigation and monitoring, nothing has changed too much from our previous discussions. So there's additional details in there about buffer averaging in lieu of fees and off-site mitigation criteria.

So one of the big things we wanted to talk about is those buffer changes. So for wetland buffer, what's the most significant changes we're seeing in this is for the category one and two wetlands with high habitat scores or high conservation values. This is the buffers. This is the eight to nine points that's highlighted. It increases them by 100 feet and then 75 feet.

It's important to note it's pretty rare development near category one and two buffer wetlands that have those high habitat scores. So we're not anticipating a lot of impact to development with those changes. And then we have some minor updates to the category three wetlands, which is also highlighted. So the best available science has an option for mitigated reduced buffers with a 100 foot vegetated corridor and minimization efforts that were released through the Department of Ecology. We are in an urban environment, so we can't really accommodate a 100 feet of wildlife corridor on every site.

But there is some mitigation that is possible. Our consultants have prepared a supplemental analysis for appropriate buffers with mitigation and how that it can apply to Kent. So this can allow some additional flexibility while maintaining no net loss of ecological function when it comes to wetlands. The most significant change that we're seeing is that compensation based on permanent wetland impact. So compensation ratios are triggered when there are permanent impacts to a wetland that can't be avoided.

So for example, if the only proposed location for a roadway or a driveway is through a wetland, compensation is required, but there are multiple options given to meet that compensation that have different ratios of compensation. So while these changes add more compensation options, it does increase that ratio through the best available science that the Department of Ecology released. So other jurisdictions are adopting the same ratios as well. And what this really does is incentivize avoiding impacts to the wetland. And then if they are an unavoidable, it creates more compensation for that impact.

Just so that I'm understanding the numbers correctly, when it says something like eight to one compensation ratio, if you if it's not avoidable, then you would have to compensate somehow eight times the amount of wetland that you remove or destroy because of the road.

Thank you. Yes. So if it was 100 square feet, by compensating, would be 800.

800. Understood. Thank you.

So we have discussed

the yes?

What options are that you talk about? Could you talk about that a little bit?

Yeah, absolutely. So the Department of Ecology released a lot of options from creation of new wetland to just mitigating the existing wetland and enhancing it by removing invasives or planting new species. Yeah. So they have different ones for, like, rehabilitation only Winding. Enhancement only, and then reestablishing wetland or creating new wetland. So typically, you will see that on a site for creation if they have that unavoidable impact for a driveway because it's near the road, then maybe the southern part of that site is created new wetland to kind of replace what was taken away from the top portion.

So if you look at the top of the table, if you look at the very top table that is not doesn't have any highlights, our old code had two columns, which are two different options. And if you look now at the table, there's many more columns. So, those are more options for how to mitigate.

Right. So, eight:one ratio is mainly for when you're creating a new wetland, not enhancing the existing wetland, I suppose.

Yes. So this example for like category one, the eight:one is for just rehabilitating the wetland and then also for category three for enhancement only, that's showing an eight:one. So it really depends on the type of wetland, if it's a high value like a bog or something, and then what the proposed mitigation is for it. So for the wildlife and fish conservation areas, we've discussed this all before. So just really quickly, we're updating that stream typing and buffers to match best available science and expanding that permitted uses like permeable trails and environmental education purposes.

And then we did update this chart, which you've seen before. But based on conversations with other South King County jurisdictions and what they're proposing within their urban environments and then as well as our agency comments. So when we submitted to Commerce, we proposed a 100 feet for fish bearing, which is what we had existing, and then 75 feet for non fish bearing streams. We did get comments back from state agencies, and then we also assessed what other jurisdictions nearest were adopting. So we had to update those for fish bearing shrimps up to a 150 feet and nonfish bearing to 100 feet, and we will talk a little bit more on that.

So based on the agency comments, we updated those buffers, but noticed some other jurisdictions weren't quite at a 150 for fish bearing streams. So we were kind of assessing that to see where everyone else was at and how they got there. Maple Valley was the first to adopt last year, and they had a 100 foot buffers for everything. And then sub subsequent comments from Fish and Wildlife after they adopted started to become a lot stronger. So once they passed that code, then we got a lot more feedback from Fish and Wildlife for all the other jurisdictions. Burrington sorry. Burien, Covington, and Ritten, they all adopted buffers that had conditions for additional requirements that needed to

be

met, including 80% vegetated corridors and less than 10% invasive species in those corridors. So if they weren't able to meet those conditions, their buffers would increase, which is why you kinda see a range. For example, Burien can go up to a 199 feet if those conditions aren't met, and Covington up to a 166 feet if they aren't met. So our standard that we had proposed is a 150, but that can be reduced with mitigation. And then while Florida that Auburn is proposing to keep a 100 feet for their fish bearing streams and 50 feet for their nonfish bearing streams.

They're still in their drafts. They're still having conversations with fish and wildlife, so they'll have to address comments from them through their process. And then SeaTac, they adopted 200 feet, but they actually indicated they didn't even have mapped type f streams for fish bearing. So it really doesn't impact them too much. So some of the best available science says to be consistent with neighboring jurisdictions.

So we did our best to align with our environment and then what we're seeing from our neighbors. And then we did run an analysis with our consultants to see kind of where the impacts were. So we're trying to balance the many different aspects of requirements. So there's increased call for infill development in the urban growth areas, and at the same time, there's an increased call for additional protections of critical areas through those larger buffers. So based on our analysis, we are proposing the 150 feet, which will impact an additional five seventy five parcels.

But this buffer does align with neighboring jurisdictions, And we do have those conditions that can help reduce it, like interrupted buffers, those roadways or things between the stream and the development. And then I know it's hard to see, but this is our existing map of stream buffers. You can see it mostly impacts East Hill. So currently, we have 100 feet for fish bearing shown in orange and then 40 feet for non fish bearing shown in yellow. And then with the proposed changes, we see a 150 feet in orange for fish bearing and then a 100 feet in yellow for the nonfish bearing.

And then we do propose to keep the valley overlay area in pink, which we had existing. It just was in a different color of the previous map. So with that, we do have a project website that we're keeping updated. We're working on those responses to the agency comments, which you guys will receive as part of the hearing. And then we're planning that hearing for February 9.

We have received one additional comment that came in this afternoon from the Master Builders Association, so we're working on reviewing that as well. So, any comments we receive in writing before the hearing will be in the packet. Otherwise, public comments are accepted in person or written comments until four p. M. The day of the hearing. They can be emailed, delivered to the clerk's office, mailed to us, emailed, or brought to the hearing, and we'll distribute them at the hearing as well. So, just for anyone that may be listening or re listening to this, there are still opportunities to provide comment on the draft ordinance. You will have a hearing on February 9 and be asked to make a recommendation to counsel at that time.

Alain, did you have a question?

So for wetland medication, there is establishment requirement and monitoring requirement. Has any of those been changed? Because Sure, yes. Can be mentioned here. I was

Yes. So currently, we have essentially, if they do impact to a wetland or wetland buffer, they have to show how they're mitigating that and how it's meeting code and state requirements. So they do submit an as built once they install that mitigation. Currently, we have an annual monitoring report. So every single year, they have to submit a report that they're meeting performance standards.

So maybe it's blackberry started growing Himalayan blackberries. If they remove that, make sure it's under 10% in different plot areas that they're assessing. And these are done by wetland biologists. Then the city has their own wetland biologist as a third party consultant that goes out and confirms the work. So five years is still required, but best available science doesn't require it every single year now. So the big change with that is we're requiring year one, three, and five versus annual. So that, you know, will save applicants money. It will save everyone time, and they can spend it more monitoring the wetland and improving it versus spending money on reports and submitting it for permits.

Thank you. Thank you, Lindsay. Thank you. All right. If there are no objections from board members at this time, we are ready for the Planning Board one hundred and one training. Staff, you may begin.

Thank you all. It is good to be here and good to see you all rearranged in your new new places. Welcome, Bonnie, to Land Use and Planning Board, and welcome back to our returning members. Tonight, I'm just gonna give an overview and a reminder on some of your roles and responsibilities. Land use and planning board is is what we call our planning commission. It actually has specific roles and responsibilities. You are the only board or commission that's delegated to have hearings on behalf of counsel. It's also recognized through different state statutes as having ability for different approvals and recommendations. You are an advisory board still, so you don't you don't get to make the final vote. That is reserved for our city council.

But I wanted just to to give a quick refresh and an introduction for those that this may be new. This may be very similar to what you all have seen before, but feel free to interrupt me if you have any questions. We're also gonna cover some of the key state laws and provisions that you all are subject to now that you are board members. So starting out, your responsibility. This is our famous triangle of growth management act, which is Washington's planning framework.

A lot of it starts at the state with state level policy that then filters down for consistency at the multi county region. For us, that's Puget Sound Regional Council, down to the county region, so King County. And then as a city, we get to put our fingerprints in it. So your task and your your body of work will be really in these darker blue areas of setting policy through the comprehensive plan, reviewing functional plans, are more specific, like our sub area plans or transportation plans or parks plans that may come before you for your unique land use perspective, and then getting into those development regulations. So what Deja and Lindsay presented tonight, where we're actually changing the city code.

You all are not tasked with looking project by project. So Deja was giving you site examples. In real life, you will not have a proposal from a developer come in and say, we want to develop on this site. And you don't give a thumbs up or thumbs down, but you set the table of the regulations that you would like to see for how that development is shaped. And then it is delegated to either our staff under administrative reviews or a hearing examiner if it requires a public hearing.

So your work is really to be forward thinking and thinking about these scenarios. So that's why we showed you a couple different sites because we wanted you to think not just on that one site that comes to mind, but how it may apply in an entire zone that sets those standards. You have there's there's different roles and responsibilities depending on who you are in this planning process. So, ultimately, I do not get to make a final decision. You do not get to make a final decision.

We're all in in the same boat in that regards. It it is our Kent City Council, and that's because they are elected by our residents in the community, and they have specific roles and responsibilities. So you as an advisory board, you're appointed by the mayor, approved by council, and you are really to act as representatives and give advice to our planning or on planning issues to the the council. And so you all do have the opportunity to hold public hearings. You're also asked to bring in your own expertise and your knowledge of living in the city to help staff have a broader perspective of what may be unintended consequences or other priorities we should be considering as we're implementing the work of the mayor and what council has directed.

And so my role as staff and our team as well as the consultants that we bring on is to bring you forward options and conversations. Ultimately, what you will normally see is something that staff are recommending that you move to review and discuss and then recommend that council adopt. But in no ways are we saying it has to be perfectly as we say it is. You may suggest recommendations that then staff will consider and filter up to council, and council may or may not take those recommendations. I already discussed hearing examiner is the one who reviews specific site development.

Hearing examiner does not get to change our code or our development standards or policies. That is the work that is reserved for this group counsel to vote on. But the hearing examiner uses the work you do in their decision making for those specific sites. A little bit more about planning intent. So who are we? What do we do? What are our different responsibilities? You all work mostly with the long range planning team. So Caroline, Tanya, myself, and Deja are officially on that team. Probably not surprising, we have consultants because we have a pretty small team for the size and the body of work that we have.

Frequently, you'll also meet MIG or framework or other groups that help assist us in preparation of materials. We also have our current planning team, which does development review, so that site specific review. This group answers front counter questions when someone calls and says, I have the site. What can I do on it? Or am I allowed to do this use in this zone from from banks or other financial groups or or developers?

Lindsey is in that group, but we have had her on loan, Matthew Chastain, who is here to talk about the infill infrastructure exemptions. Also, on the current planning team, we like to do cross training for the planners that are seeing things that are happening on the ground for development to also come talk about policy and vice versa. So since I gave this presentation last year, we do have two new current planners. Ashley Bailey and James Kramer joined the team. So we are all staffed up in both planning teams for the first time since I've been here.

So that's an exciting exciting thing to have. Tanya does support both long range and current planning teams. And then we also have our our good colleague, Maureen, who oversees our rental housing inspection program. So that is vital for protection of bay basic life safety property for multifamily housing for renter protections and making sure that they're up to a standard that's livable and safe. Then finally, the hearing examiner is a contracted position.

We don't have one established in our city, but we contract with them as we have needs for additional hearings. So your responsibilities. Hopefully, this isn't a surprise to any of you, and you don't feel like we signed you up and gave you a bait and switch for something else. But, really, it is to use your own unique lived perspective and to listen and learn from your colleagues to provide recommendations for what you think is in the city's best interest overall and the community's best interest. And so, really, the topics before you will focus on land use and housing and planning generally.

But you'll notice even tonight, were talking about transportation and walking and pedestrian amenities. So land use does have its fingers that creep into other topics that you will be asked to make make recommendations on or or consider as you're making your recommendations. You are an advisory group, and we ask that you represent the city in a professional manner. So it's rare that we would have something where we would take you into the community to have a public hearing. But if for some reason we were out in the field doing something, we just ask that you keep the hat on that you also are a land use of planning board member in addition to being a resident.

So you all have the opportunity to vote on legislative actions, and that is a vote as a recommendation for how you would suggest that council vote on the final action. And so this is something that, again, is broader and normally applies. Every once in a while, there will be a rezone or a comp plan land use change that may be site specific, but it's never going to be specific to we're putting a McDonald's here. It would be more of, is this general land use or zoning appropriate for this broader location? And so we ask you again.

It's advisory in nature. You are not required to all agree with each other. So if you have objections or if you would like to see amendments in order to sway your vote to a yes, I recommend approval, you are welcome to do that. And we ask that you follow we loosely follow Robert's rules of of order, and we'll get into that in a minute. So what you'll see, we talked about this already.

I did also want to highlight environmental regulations. So we've seen critical areas the last couple times at Land Use and Planning Board. Shoreline will be coming up in 2029. SEPA, which we did for comprehensive plan, we did a SEPA infill exemption. You all have a a variety of areas that we as staff are here to support and educate you on and ask for your recommendations on as well.

And then we do have other policies. So our public works group frequently likes to come to talk about the six year rolling transportation improvement program. We've had parks representatives come talk about some of the work that they're doing. Human services and our economic development team have come in the past. So if there's areas that you would like to know more about in order to help with your decision making or just general knowledge of what's happening and how things work together in the city, we do have time for some of those presentations throughout the year.

So this is my fun rare scenarios and how to handle them. This gets into what would you do in these situations. Normally, I will pick one or two and ask you how you would respond or what you think an appropriate response as a land use and planning board member is. So we'll say number three number one, ex parte communication. So there's communication that's happening. Either you all are emailing each other beforehand or texting or you decide to hold a secret meeting and you find out that that meeting is happening. How should we handle that situation?

So you mean if other members meeting and you don't know about it?

Or if you get asked to join into a secret meeting before this official meeting is happening because you're a public board, so everything's supposed to happen in

Yeah. I think if in regard to the subject that is related to this meeting, you should come to this meeting. Correct.

Put a big stop. Simon says stop. Red light. Do not continue. Do not pass go. Do not have that conversation if it's a matter that is before the board. So that is the first thing is no outside conversations about the work that we're discussing. Now if you happen to all be friends with with Sandra's neighbor and you all happen to be at a fiftieth birthday party for that neighbor, you're allowed to be in the same area. We just ask that you, one, don't talk about critical areas ordinance and whether the buffers should be different sizes or the mitigation ratios should be different. Don't talk about the work that's on our agendas, which I hope you don't talk about in social settings.

It's not that interesting anyways. And then two, just think through the lens of of the appearance of bias. So if for some reason all of you are huddled together in an area and stop talking anytime an outsider comes in, it it's not wrong technically, but it doesn't look great. And so just present yourselves as if, you're in a normal social setting, but you are allowed to be in the same place. We just don't want you having any communication about the topics without it being in an official meeting setting. Another oh, did anyone have any questions on that one? Okay. Another example. I like this one. So meetings feel like they're a waste of time. What would you do in that situation?

Usually, the chair would mention it to Kristen, and Kristen would probably have a conversation with a particular member if they feel like the member isn't preparing or kind of doing their due diligence, applying and fulfilling the role that they've been nominated for?

Yeah. So we do ask that you come prepared. So if you're noticing someone's always flipping through and taking conversations on a tangent or not reviewing materials, If you have that concern, please come address them to me. Also, it could be us as staff that are wasting your time, and you feel like this is not a useful waste use a useful presentation. You're not adding anything. You know, we've heard the same thing five times before. Please get to the point. And so we want to make use of your time as well. So if you're feeling like these meetings are not productive, our goal is we want to keep you all engaged and interested in this topic and not dreading our meetings. So please feel free to come talk to me about it if you have concerns.

We'll do one more number seven. Council's decision is different from your recommendation. So example, you all say, absolutely not. We do not think council should adopt whatever this we don't think they should adopt pink as the official color for the city. We strongly oppose it from x for x, y, and z. We don't recommend it. Council goes forward, they say, we are adopting pink as the city's official color. And you feel that's wrong. What how do you handle that situation? Is there anyone else who would like to?

Oh, yeah. Well, one option is to run against them in a future election.

Okay, that's extreme.

But it is an avenue. Yes, that was my comment, Ali. Will

Yes, I think that's council's prerogative. So, it's period.

That's yeah. We're an advisory board, right? No. So, we put We can always talk

to the council members and find out their reasoning, but the bottom line is they're elected, we're not.

I' not saying you have to like everything counsel does that is in no way where what I' here to say you all retain your first amendment rights you all retain the ability to talk to our council members as as concerned constituents. We do ask that if if there were an instance where land use and planning board had a split vote and recommended one thing, we do ask that if you have something that is not from the land use and planning board's perspective that you don't represent the land use and planning board and say, on behalf of land use and planning board, I have a different opinion, but to represent yourself if you're going to a future meeting to speak out on something. We also you know, council retains the right. If they vote in a way that you all did not recommend, they do retain that right. You are welcome to reach out and talk with them, and it's their choice whether they choose to meet with you or not.

I found them to all be willing to have conversations with residents and and to learn different perspectives. Ultimately, if you feel like you just can't get past it, you could have a conversation with me and say, you know, I just I've lost faith. I'd like to remove myself. Or you can say, you know what? It's not the way I would have done it, but I wanna continue contributing, and I'd like to be part of this board. So lots of options. Chair Reid's suggestion, you can run. That is also an option. But largely, is just to remind ourselves this is advisory in nature, and we are you all retain the ability to also be individuals as well. So a couple key points.

Public records. So open government is an essential part of Washington state. In Washington, we have open public meetings requirements. We have information about disclosure of information that are much more stringent than other local governments or state governments elsewhere throughout The US. So all of our meetings and emails are public records.

So if you send me something saying, jeez, that person was really smelly to like, at the meeting, know that that could show up on a headline in any newspaper. If they requested it for some reason, they could find it, and we can't redact that information. There's very specific things that the state law says we can redact, so personal identifiable information. But saying that someone was smelly does not count under that. So just always consider what you're saying.

Another key point of Open Public Meetings Act is that it's not just when you're physically in a meeting or in a room. It's anytime that you are considering business, and business has a a broad meaning. And so that could be email communications. It could be email discussions. It could be text messages. As we have more technology options, it gets trickier on this. And so when we send you information, we will try to BCC you, which means blind carbon copy. So we will try to send it so that you don't accidentally rep reply out and say, I think this proposal's great. I'm going to vote for it. Or can we change this to 100 and whatever?

And then Bonnie chimes in, and then Sandra chimes in. We wanna avoid any discussions outside of when we are officially in these seats or attending virtually. So just think before you know, if you're sending something saying, here's my availability, that's great. Totally fine. If it's a content topic, that's where we need to be really careful on making sure that we're not doing any sort of extra decision making or conversations or negotiations on things or weighing of options outside of when we're in this meeting.

So other points, we're required if we're going to be taking action, need to have a quorum, which means four people or from the Land Use and Planning Board right now because we have a full seven people on our on our board. We also have requirements for in order for you all to have a meeting and take action, we have to have a certain number of people physically present versus virtual. And so there will be times when we will say, there's a vote tonight. Can you confirm that you will be physically here? So one of our board members for the first part of the year has a conflict where they're unable to physically attend, but they can virtually attend.

So that's a known process. Sometimes we will allow attendance, if you request it, has to be approved from the chair and myself. And that is a process that is outlined in our code. And so if you're not feeling well but you're well enough to virtually attend, we always encourage. If you can attend, that's great. There's a virtual option. But there are times when we need physically to have bodies here per our city code in order to make votes and actions. There's a lot of requirements that you all don't necessarily need to worry about in terms of posting of notices for hearings, notices about public hearings. A lot of that is covered by Tanya. She keeps us in shape on that.

And then also, there's an open public meeting training requirement. I believe all of you are up to date. I believe, Bonnie, you may have a new requirement or a new session that you need to complete. It it's on a rolling basis. So what constitutes a meeting? We discussed this already. We want to, again, avoid any sort of instances where we're not making sure that we're notifying the public. So there are opportunities. I said, you know, you need to be here. You may remember when we did the comprehensive plan, we did do some bus tours or or van tours where we notified the public and said there will be a quorum, and people will be traveling to look and discuss these items.

No actions being taken, but we let people know about it. So there are ways that we can do some of those, but I would say do not independently plan to do that with a group of you all unless you're working with Tanya and I to schedule and coordinate so that we can make sure all those noticing procedures are correct. So Robert's rules. So who is Robert, and what are these rules? So Robert's rules of order is a manual that is used to help guide meetings and facilitate meetings so that, one, that not everyone's speaking at once.

And also, two, there's a clear line of understanding of what happened in the meeting and then that all everyone had an equal chance to speak before people are repeating themselves or getting second shots at discussing. And then also, it helps with the record for keeping a record of what happened and ultimately what decisions were made and what influenced those decisions. And so we're not asking you to take a full Robert's Rule course. I've taken various ones where they use different dinosaur sizes to help break it down. It can be quite complex, but we are asking that you respect the general framework.

And so Ben, as the chair, will call on you prior to speaking, and his role is to make sure everyone has a chance to speak before we start calling on people for a second time. Also, to maintain order. So a lot of this is also to avoid back and forth conversations. Normally, goal is that you direct comments to staff as opposed to having deliberations and and discussions between each other of kind of one upping each other in an argument or a discussion, and so directing your comments to staff for consideration. There are a set of ways to make a motion.

So this comes in normally when you all have something before you where you have a public hearing and then you're asked to make a recommendation to counsel through a motion. We can go through this as the need arises, but typically what happens is one person will make the motion. Staff typically provide you sample language. And if you agree with that, you can use it. You can always change it if you would like, but we don't want you to feel like you have to create something off the off off the top of your head.

And then what happens is one member will will make a motion, and then it requires before you can have any discussion on it, a second member needs to say, I second that and I agree. So if someone were to make a motion and no one seconds it, that motion dies on the floor, and there's not extra discussion about it. So you're not saying you agree necessarily that that motion should go forward. You're saying, I agree that we should have discussion about this and have further conversation. And so once there's a motion and a second, then that motion is what the priority of that conversation is.

So all of your conversation afterwards should be on that motion until there's either an amendment or there's a a vote on that motion. And so, typically, we don't get into lots of amendment processes. Every once in a while, we will. Amendments are allowed, and that is kind of its own thing. Amendments, think of it again. They require a second as well. So if someone says, no. I make an amendment that the color should be pink and blue, it would need someone else to second that. Otherwise, if no one seconds it, then you go back to just talking about your original motions. It sounds more complex than it is.

We're not super strict on Robert's rules, but we do want to maintain it's really about a a level of professionalism and respect is that is what we're prioritizing. This last part is council chambers and safety. So just like to do a refresher. If something trust your gut. If you're walking into a building and someone's walking really close to you or shouting out at you and you feel like it's a little bit weird and that doesn't happen normally, let staff know, or return to your car.

Always kind of just be aware of your surroundings in generally in general, and keep distance if you don't know a person and you're getting a weird feeling from them. Other things to know, where the exits in the building are. So in this building, behind where this great green sign is, there's an exit at this door. There's two doors here, which will go into the main lobby, which then if you go into the lobby and make a right, there's an exit out onto 4th as well, or you can run through the lobby into the area between the two buildings, the parking area between Centennial and City Hall. Your last exit is a little bit tricky.

This door goes into a small IT computer area that has a second door behind it. So this is another option for you if you need an exit quickly. We ask that you only use this one in emergencies just because there's cords and other things that normally if you just need to leave, find the quickest exit. I did want to just bring up a couple other things. So at evening, especially in fall and winter, it's dark.

We recommend you use the buddy system to walk to your cars and other things. So just best practices, avoid distractions. So keeping your phones. Our police chief likes to say, like, cell phones out makes an easy target for someone just to swipe it or to do something else while you're paying attention to your screen. And so keeping cell phones in pockets or or in bags is is recommended.

The these are a little bit more serious ones that we're getting into now. So if for some reason there was an active shooter or a threat of an active shooter, the order of operations is run, hide, fight. So, ideally, we would know where these exits are, and we just get out of the building. If that's not possible, we would want to hide. And then if someone were causing a threat and we had no other options, the last resort is fight.

Our best option is to call 911 immediately. And the city has a protocol that has we can call 911, and we identify ourself. We would say we're city staff. You'd say you're on a city board. And if you say, I'm on a city board, I'm at city campus, and there's an active threat, that will help because the 911 dispatch is for a variety of areas.

And so by identifying you're at City Campus, this is a city threat. You're acting on a city board or city capacity that helps them identify more quickly prioritizing what's happening and and how to respond. So in the moment, likely, it'll be Tanya or I that actually make that call. But if for some reason you need to make that call, remember to identify yourself as a city representative and where you're at on a city campus. And then last but not least, if for some reason staff or Kent Police Department are asking us to do something, if it's could be earthquake escape routes, it could be because of other active threats.

Listen to staff in Kent Police Department. I know sometimes it's it's easy to be like, I'm just gonna go back and grab a bag, or I'm just gonna help this other person. A lot of times, the situations are really, like, happening really quickly. And so to the extent that we can abide by what our law enforcement is saying, that helps them move on to the other issues that they need to address as well. So these are all worst case scenarios.

I hope we never have to do them, but I did want to raise again, just we do this every year of just a general safety knowing where things are. If you exit through this door or the ones here across the hall where our city clerks are, there is an area that's secured that you need special access for. Tanya and I both have special key cards to get into that area. And so if we did need to adjourn, not even necessarily for a threat, but there was just something happening and we needed if the room was really rowdy and we said we just need to lower the temperature, calm down, let things reset, we can go into that room as well. And so there's options.

I would say the chair and I normally have a lot of conversations before meetings and talk about what we expect, remind each other on safety protocols and other things, but I just want to have it fresh in all of our minds as we're kicking off the new year.

Any questions about any of that?

Okay. Well, thank you. We're looking forward to the new year. We will have the hearing for the critical areas ordinance, and then we'll be bringing briefings on the Recode Kent phase two work as well and then moving into hearings for that.

Thank you.

Thank you, Kristen. Members, are there any questions for staff? All right. If there are no further any if there is no further business to bring before the board, since there is no further business, this meeting is adjourned. All right. I'll get the script down.

Sorry. Bye, Justice.