Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

All right, commissioners. Hello, hello. We've got a lot of commissioners here, and I'm sure a lot of commissioners have a lot to say, so we want to get started. And we're going to call this meeting, this joint meeting of the PPC as well as the DC to order, and it currently is 6.34 p.m. A little boilerplate, today's meeting is a hybrid meeting. The commissions are in person, but staff or members of the public may be attending virtually or in person. Feels like I know the answer to this, but I'm gonna ask anyway to make it official. Kristen, do we have a quorum?

Okay, great, we can talk, we can speak. We'll begin, as we always do, with public comment. And for this meeting, we're gonna hold general public comment at this time for all general topics being discussed this evening. So we're going to include the planning policy agenda items as well right now.

Okay. I like it. Has anyone signed up to speak this evening?

Okay. I don't think we need to go through absences or anything, right? No. We won't shame anybody. Okay. We're going to skip all the boilerplate for public comment. We're just going to get right down to business. That's why we're all here. And our first item of business is to discuss architectural design standards for Issaquah amongst other cities. Adding flexibility and predictability to the design standards is one of the items on the promoting building investments in Issaquah's work plan. Kristen Leeson. planning manager is going to begin the presentation as long as her computer is working.

Hi, can we go back a slide? So Northwest Contemporary, is it allowed in both traditional Issaquah and urban core or only? Okay, so the other six, are they allowed in urban core or is only Northwest Contemporary?

So urban court can only have Northwest contemporary or Northwest revival. Correct. But none of the others. Correct. Thank you.

Commissioner all owner. I just had a question about the evolution of all of this. Um, when were these standards promulgated?

Just one more comment. I'd like to distinguish between styles and standards.

So when I look at this list, it's like we're really looking backwards. So was that a theme that was guiding the decisions? Because mid-century modern, which we do have buildings like that, is not included or anything that's going modern. So it's like was the theme to look backwards and try to recreate what was in the past versus trying to develop more of a synchronistic community that is both backwards and forwards looking. Cause it seems like we're stepping back instead of like reaching forward to whatever's possible in the future.

To help me with your name, Commissioner Fassoon?

Mr. Matthews. Sorry, one more question. What is Northwest Revival considered? That was one I forgot to look up. I'm sorry. I looked at all of them and I just don't remember that particular design style.

Okay, I think we're gonna keep going. We're gonna have plenty more time to ask Kristin questions, but let's let her continue with the presentation.

They also have, though, a lot of three-block passages.

So start with questions. Okay. Now it's your guys' time. Lots of questions. I'll start with one just quick question. If is a clause the most prescriptive was Bellevue the least prescriptive? And Sammamish was the next most prescriptive. Yes. Woodinville was what third?

Okay, that's a great explanation. All right, time to open it up. Commissioner Kress, I know you've been waiting patiently.

I was going to say the only thing to add to Commissioner Crass's point, it's not just the city council that's changed. It's also other demands from Olympia, the state. So there's, yeah, to your point. So things have changed in 10 years. We'll keep that one off the mic. Commissioner Adair.

So this is actually directed towards Morgan and Brennan, and something you guys said earlier, and I just want to clarify about when we were originally putting these standards into play and getting the consultant, which was, did I hear correctly that the developers wanted more strict was it that they wanted less flexibility so they knew what to expect or so they could get more certainty? Because I just don't want to go back too far the other direction and wind up, you know, there's kind of a push and pull here, right, as Michael said, and, sorry, as Commissioner Britton said, and I just don't w

I never knew about that. Kristen just shared that with me the other day.

I can't remember who said it, whether it was Commissioner Morgan or Commissioner Brennan, but that's part of the issue, too, is having such a difficult permit process, which some of the feedback I've heard from developer friends has been the permit process in Issaquah is difficult, and being able to have Certainty in that part of developing would be much more helpful for developers, whether they get what they want or not. At least they know quickly versus they go seven steps down the road to find out that, nope, you're going back to square one. Oh, just one thing. Commissioner Fassoon.

Would anyone else like to speak? I feel like a few people here are taking up a large part of the conversation. Commissioner Matthews?

So it kind of, you know, everyone's afraid to start from scratch. But the problem is we have like a... a dream for Issaquah, that's not the right word, but it's like to make it pedestrian friendly, to create a vibrant community, and are these design styles gonna get us there? I mean, is that why we're doing this? It makes no sense to me why we're sticking hard and fast, we have to have this and that, because you're looking at materials that are required, so you can't have metal roofs because an arts and crafts building's supposed to have shingle roofs, and it's like now you're becoming way too

Thank you. So as Commissioner Morgan and Brennan mentioned, it was all done in 2009 through 2016, and that was the time when we really had a lot of development happening in the city. And I truly believe now we're in a little bit opposite situation. So we want the development to happen in the city and development now is struggling and it's hard to develop in the city. So instead of limiting, well, I would think we should let the developers have a little bit more freedoms or more freedoms. So, well, I'm working in Bellevue. I'm there every day. And Bellevue is growing. And the whole area, I'm wo

Yes, it was up for a while there. Just a couple of observations. As we looked at the visual examples of good architecture in the various cities, I was struck by how similar they are. And yet, their regulations, their massing, and there are all sorts of different requirements, and yet they end up looking remarkably similar. So I don't want to understate the importance of what we're talking about, but at the same time, if it's possible to design and build a building in Redmond And in Issaquah that look very similar, does it really matter that much that the regulations are dissimilar? The other o

Just to kind of build off of what Katja and Eric and Sandra and Commissioner Matthews were saying, sorry. I like the idea of having... I will go against the grain. I do like the idea of having styles because I do think it points people in a direction of like, this is the feel and the vibe we want. However, I don't think they need to be super prescriptive. I think we can say your building should be inspired by styles such as craftsman, Northwest traditional, et cetera. you know, so that we don't get some awful brutalist Bauhaus thing, right? Sorry, that's my personal taste. I know some people l

It sounds like you kind of... are thinking more like Bellevue, where they have a strong intent, even in a direction. So it is kind of swinging that pendulum this way.

Yeah, sorry to go off of what you said. Yeah, if we're very clear, this is what our intent is, but you can get there multiple ways.

I think you might find more than a few people agree with you here. Commissioner Stanchak.

That's great. Thank you, commissioner. Stand check. Um, one thing I'll just mention and then I'll pass it back to John and then we're going to want to do a time check to make sure you're getting what you want before eight. is two things, I think. One, again, Commissioner Kress brought this up. It is a very different environment than 10 years ago. And I think someone else brought it up. We were developing like crazy. We had these development agreements that were coming through. The Development Commission was working overtime every month of every week. So that has changed. We do not have that si

That's all. You could sell that bumper sticker all over town. A rule book, not a guidebook. And I don't know who brought a blue building. There was... No, I know... right right right i feel like right i feel like it's woldemort or something right we're not supposed to speak its name um commissioner stanchek

I'm going to give a leading question to Kristen here. Are people building these styles, our existing seven styles? Are people building them?

That was a... that was a lead in so you can get to your considerations.

So we can do this in one of a few ways. We could do it by raising of hands. How many questions you have for Kristen? So what is that for the half hour left? It's about seven minutes per. seven minutes we can either go around, people can give their opinion, we can vote, we can do it, you know, obviously a non-binding vote, but we just want to do a round robin.

Maybe like a time box discussion on this.

I'm not going to mess with the presenter. I don't want to get in trouble. But we'll start with this one if we want to come back to when we can. We'll have like two minutes to spare. But we're on a hard 8 o'clock, so... We'll start with Commissioner Stanchek.

Yeah, I kind of touched on this earlier. I think keep them as inspiration style guides, but make them less prescriptive. So kind of put them in an intent. We would like you to be inspired by some of these styles.

I would actually say to get rid of them or to redo them. As Commissioner Brennan was saying, some are not even relevant. One of them is the Chicago style. Like Louis Sullivan, we're going back to the 1800s. But we also don't have a mid-century modern. If somebody wants to do a flat roof that's a green roof, there's not an option. So we need to either replace some of them and make all of them less prescriptive. But I don't think we should keep all seven the way they are.

I like everything that everyone has said I think I think keeping them as as guides as recommendations makes a lot of sense but frankly I'm confused and as an architect I shouldn't be but I know that the difference between arts and crafts and And I can't remember the other one. And craftsmen. Are they really very different styles? And who decides what is what? And so I think having them be things that we like and wouldn't it be nice if you, you know, looked at some of things that were Northwest Lodge, for example, and incorporated that but not be prescriptive about it. Thank you. Commissioner Z

Thank you. Well, I think we should keep them only as visual inspirations and not as prescriptions, and definitely not as prescriptions of material that have to be used to build, just as a recommended visual inspiration for your design. You can use any materials, but that's kind of style that we want. Maybe that's the only reason to keep them. Thank you.

In alignment with a lot of what's been said, I like the idea of leaning more into the design intent, utilizing some of those styles as examples. I think leaning into the categories a little bit more, but loosening the specificity of them is probably a way to kind of move that needle more, or swing the pendulum, if you will, more towards being a little bit more flexible there.

Great. And what a great group. We should meet more often. Yeah, I'm in agreement. I really liked what Commissioner Kras said. Rulebook, not a guidebook. I think, again, a stronger intent. Rulebook. Guidebook, not a rulebook. Thank you. That bumper sticker would not have sold. But yeah, just having a little bit less prescriptive and a much stronger intent. As far as the seven styles themselves, I would say I like Commissioner Morgan's for interim purposes because staff obviously needs to study this. I don't know if it's going to require a consultant or what, or if we can do this on our own, but

I don't know how much you're going to get in addition here. I know. I know. Let's do that. Should we do round robin again? I would like to defer to Commissioner Allender too, but this seems to make more sense because we're trying to do a rapid round. So Commissioner, stand check.

I defer to Eric. No, I don't have a lot to say that's different. I agree those six categories make sense. And I think pulling them out as separate from the style as the developers mentioned and making specific rules about them, but not being too prescriptive.

Yes, I absolutely agree with Commissioner Brennan because when I looked at the roof, the specificity, it was kind of like, that's ridiculous. So, I totally agree, don't make it so specific, but have those categories. Commissioner Holder.

Agree with all of that. At the risk of adding more complexity and going back to Chairman Voice's comment about Voldemort, I think if we wanted to add colors and be more prescriptive about colors that appear in nature, as opposed to artificial electric blue or whatever, that that might be something to consider. Commissioner Zakharov.

Well, I would agree with Commissioner Adair on this. And yeah, I think we should keep the categories, but we should really be less prescriptive. And as for the color blue, you know, that bright blue appears in nature.

I think it's all been well said about the category thing.

Thank you, sir. Yeah. I think just an analogy is that currently I think a lot of the categories read as checklists and they should be more like guidelines and just kind of go back to the whole rule book thing. So, definitely in favor of trying to find a way to loosen the, the specificity of those a little bit. I will take a second to ask Kristin kind of a follow up question related to something that was said here on this round, which was one thing we don't want to do is kind of, you know, one step forward, two steps back. And if we go in the direction we are, which is loosening the standards i

Thank you. Follow up question. Isn't right now currently design review is at a certain level and everything, right? Because before, prior, it used to be like level one through four. Now it's like only three and four.

Right, okay. I think there are great points made by everybody. I won't go into all of them. I think those six different aspects, what, two, three, four, five different aspects, six different aspects, missing a comma. Yeah, door walls. I think those are fine. I think Kristen made the point earlier, really massing scale and rough lines, I think, are even more critical. But again, I really like this idea of a guidebook, not a rule book. So I think that'll be helpful.

OK, this one we'll just do an open mic night. Anyone want to chime in on number three, or we'll move right by it?

Any additional comments? Number three? Thank you, Commissioner Brennan. And finally, number four. Any other suggestions? I think we've all kind of more or less informally kind of given you the guidance that we think, which is more homework for city staff, of course. But any other suggestions? Do you have what you need, Kristen?

We love having you, if it makes any difference.

Excellent. Well, again, I want to say thank you to the development commission. And, yeah, I would love to do this again and keep this going. Always learn a lot from our colleagues around the city. And it brings out the best in us, too. So, again, thank you, Commissioner Stanchak, Commissioner Morgan, Commissioner Brennan, and Commissioner Fassoon, and your staff liaison. So Kristen has everything she needs. We are going to take, what, a five-minute break? We will take a five-minute break to reset, but thank you all again. Have a great night, and we'll see you soon.

All right. All right. It is very distracting, but anyway. All right, we're here for part two. Our commission just got, our joint commission is over and our commission looks a lot smaller now, around the dais. We are going to begin, however, with our boilerplate items, always important. Where am I? Approval of minutes. So you guys should have gotten two different sets of minutes in your agenda packets for August 13th and August 20th. Let's start with August 13th. Any issues or concerns? That's right, you weren't. Excuse me. Okay. All right, those meeting minutes are approved. August 20th. Both

Any issues or concerns? All right. Those meeting minutes are approved. Both sets of meeting minutes are now approved. All right, more regular business. Next up is a final review of the proposed 2026 comprehensive plan updates. Kate Caney, our principal planner, will be presenting. So Kate, hopefully you got your computer back and you can now go ahead and present when you're ready.

We can do this one by one. Makes sense. All right. Any comments or questions? Commissioner Kras, you do like the definition? Okay, fair enough. Great. Yeah, it seems pretty straightforward. I don't think I have anything to add.

So these 1,060 units are units that will be built on Raleigh properties or are currently existing on Raleigh properties?

They're kind of saying, yes, we intend to build these, but we're not required to, but this is what our intent is. Right.

I think we're going to stop real quick. You thought you were going to make it through all the amendments, Kate.

Wasn't there a story about the Red Robin, the old Red Robin? Yes. Is it? It shows you how far off I go over there. Yes.

Any questions? No, I think to Kate's point, yeah, Vice Chair Patterson, when he mentioned the 62 to 65 and 73 to 75, made a lot of expense, because again, it's aspirational, so. Brought a flashback. So, no, I think that's it.

Thank you. You guys thought we were done? And more regular business. and it looks like Kate and Kristen might be swapping spots, but our next item under regular business is to discuss proposed amendments to long-term bicycle parking. This will interest Commissioner Craft. Kristen Leeson, our planning manager, is going to begin the presentation. So Kristen, when you're ready and your computer is ready, please go ahead.

I always felt like our bike situation was very bullish. Even I remember when we were doing it, I don't know if we had just everybody on the commission was a bicyclist, but it always felt like it was very heavy handed. I'm actually looking at my first bike for next spring. So yeah, looking at the track down here in Issaquah, those kinds of amazing bikes. Yeah, I'll go with you. Okay, now back to business. Commissioner Adair.

So my question is, in the proposed, you have two Bs. So would it include one secure room or enclosed area as well as the two B, or would it just be the two B that you have there?

So the requirement would be the secure room or enclosed area with a locked gate, limited access, within a field of view security system, and within 100 feet of a building's primary pedestrian, correct?

So if I understood that correctly, so one still applies, and you're just saying two would just be down to 2B. You're saying one does not apply anymore.

Right. So 1 and 3 are gone. 2A, 2C, 2D are gone. If I'm reading this right, 2B is the only thing that you're proposing, which is within a field of view of security system.

Can you put the proposed code on the screen so we can look at it? Is that right? Okay.

Oh, so we're only talking about numbers right now.

I think I'm confused because of what's in the packet.

So the proposed row has only 2B in the. Correct. That's what we're getting confused with here. Ah. But is that all the existing, but the change to 2B?

2B, the adjustment on the screen, the red.

I'll just throw in some justification. I am good with it. I guess the one thing I was thinking to myself was like, is there data that would back this up, meaning like ridership, ownership of bikes? The only thing that came to mind is I remember we looked at a study at one point in the last couple years where it was like how people get to work, and bikes was like I don't even think it was categorized as part of other. It was like 1.2%. Um, yeah. So, I mean, I guess like anecdotally I would imagine one in four people has a, I don't know, like I was just trying to think of like how it would make sense. I do think like one to one or 200 units to 200 spaces, probably a little extreme.

Yeah, so I think the data speaks. I know we're a bike town. I would assume Redmond is also, as you just mentioned. So that lines up. The only other question I had was commercial bike space. Is that the thing?

To throw you a curveball, grass style, can you explain the logic behind having showers provided for cyclists? And is that strictly necessary?

Oh, so it's like if someone bikes to Costco so they can shower when they get there? If they work at Costco, they can bike there and shower? I'm trying to understand the logic.

Yeah, you said a good point. Or at least you hope you do. Right. Commissioner Krause.

But Vice Chair Patterson makes a good point. And I know it's not a size thing, but it does say tier one only. So those are, I missed the one. Central Issaquah, Old Town, and? Thank you. But yeah, it would be good to know if that's triggered by size. Okay. Other questions, comments? Commissioner Matthews.

Yeah, I think I'd like to see clarification on what the non-residential is, too. So say, like, would Safeway have to put in a shower? I mean, yeah, I guess you'd want them to, but I mean, I guess it does make sense to do it by how many people work at an office.

Just a comment about geographic locations. So up in the Highlands, there are a lot of trails. and a lot of people mountain bike or trail bike up there. And so my guess is that there would be somewhat more of a demand up there. But again, if you're living up in the highlands, you can put your bike in your unit if you run out of spaces. So I just think it's somewhat geographically dependent, but I understand the desire to eliminate the tiers. But I am in favor of 0.25.

Uh, one more kind of comment suggestion. I think one of the letters from the public mentioned something about, um, basically other ways to find bike parking, like investments, whether it be city parks and rec maybe type of thing. Um, I know it's not strictly residential, but like to provide bike parking options throughout the city. Um, I know like Sound Transit might be another option to explore. I'm thinking about the park and ride over by Tibbetts has like bike storage lockers. There's like a dozen of them. But like I think there's things that exist that could help the vision or the intent b

Commissioner Zacharoff, did you want to say anything? Okay. Any other comments, questions? I just appreciate you guys clarifying that with Kristen and Vice Chair Patterson about the .25, because originally I thought, wow, that's drastic. And now that you bring up Redmond, and again, Redmond is bike capital of Washington State, so again, that helped put it in perspective. And these still seem pretty, I don't know, they still seem... I don't know what the word is, draconian, as far as, you know, for people to build this. But I guess it can always be looked at. I guess pulling the one, I just, ye

All right. So we have more regular business. Our next item is on July 27th, the Planning Policy Commission held a public hearing regarding several items on the PBI work plan. Regarding, sorry, I lost my place. Regarding ground floor transparency, the commission recommended amending residential ground floor transparency from 70% to 40% for residential, not including townhomes, and from 70% to 45% for commercial uses, except for the urban core where the requirement would remain 70%. The Planning, Development and Environment Committee is making a different recommendation to the full council. At o

Yeah, no, that was, yes. Commissioner Adair did an awesome job. Yeah, let's put it on the screen and then we'll, yeah, yeah. We've got four minutes, we're good. No, just kidding. Yes.

Yeah, I'm open if you guys have any wording you'd like to add. I kind of wanted to take a very straightforward approach and not try and ascribe any motives or speculation to what they were doing or why they chose it. I think one of the things we should be concerned about, or not concerned as in upset, but one thing we should keep in mind is that the PDE will be presenting their side at council, and we'll have the opportunity to explain, whereas we might not necessarily have that opportunity for rebuttal.

I hadn't thought about that, but now that you mentioned it, I think it's a reasonable request. And I say that because they kind of ask the same of us, right? If you recall, there was a very strict script of like, why did you feel this way? Like what recommendation are you making? Why did you make it? Like they wanted to know from us, like why we felt the way we did about the things we recommended. And so I think that's probably what was jarring about this was that it got to that point. We, at least thus far, we haven't really heard kind of why they went that way which was very different from I

15% Yeah, I think the issue is that they're gonna be voting on it at the time So there's not going to be an opportunity for us to like change our arguments. Do you know what I'm saying? Based on what they say, I mean so I see what you're saying I could offer my opinion and why they chose what they chose based on what I've seen in but Which is I just think they think less regulation will lead to more building and Um, it's one way to put it, but yeah, if you have some phrases or ideas, we can workshop it. Yeah. Let's throw it in. See how it sounds.

Um, I'll just say from my point of view, full transparency did workshop a little bit with commissioner there. Very little bit, very modest tweaks. I actually think, you know, in fairness to the council, one thing they would say is they did deliberate at that night at the PDE. say watch the video if you want to know what our thinking was and the other thing is when writing something like this it should be straightforward it should be dispassionate it's really and i think commissioner adair did a great job of doing that it provides the information the council members will see it in their packets

And I would just add, since they asked us what our rationale was, they had an opportunity to tell us what theirs was, and they did not.

Yeah, well, like I said, we've got time.

I guess I'll ask the staff, like, did they provide rationale? Like, should we go watch the video? I don't know. If you have it off the top of your brain, or I can go figure it out myself. If you don't know, it's okay, too.

Okay well there's their justification I suppose. Again it doesn't really change the way I feel but if anyone else has any edits or comments now is the time. I mean, I think there's an argument to be made. I just, again, I like the straightforward no, trying to make people feel like they made a bad decision and just here's why we disagree.

I guess I'll throw one other just, I guess, suggestion out, which is do we want to provide a fallback line? Meaning we say, like to add to what you've already written is like, do we say 40% or no less than 30 or something like that? Or is that too much? Okay. Then I think we just live with it.

I think they're probably gonna sort of gravitate towards a compromise. I mean, I would think most people on their own. Yeah.

Yeah. But yeah, other than that, I think it's a great letter. I think you did an awesome job. I,

And I really appreciate the comments. Like, I am open to, like, if we have a stronger conclusion, you know, we want to do, but I'm, it's late at night, my brain broken.

I second what Vice Chair Patterson said. Yeah, no, and again, what Commissioner Grass, what everybody said, which, again, you did a fantastic job, Commissioner, there. I'm happy to put my name on it, too.

Thank God. Okay. I hate that thing. Yeah, I don't care. Right. I won't even say it here because we're on camera, but, yeah, I hate DocuSign. Okay. Commissioner Adair, are you happy?

Yeah, I'm very happy. Thank you, guys. I appreciate all of your input, and I know we've all worked really hard on this, and so thank you for that. And, Kristen, thank you for all of your hard work and your guidance. And do you want it in a document like Doc X?

It's not very often I get to ask a commissioner, did you get everything you needed? Okay. Well, wonderful. Been a long night. Commissioner Adair, your brain is not the only one that's broken. So let's get out of here. We're going to go real quickly through reports. City Council updates, please.

Okay. other business or announcements are there any updates to the calendar or other business or announcements from city staff none all right commissioners anything for the good of the order nope i think we're all in agreement again thank you commissioner adair for your hard work that was fantastic and uh next meeting is a public hearing um So yeah, we'll have that to look forward to. Otherwise, we will adjourn this meeting at 8.52 p.m. Good night, everyone.