►
From YouTube: Bellevue City Council, October 2 2017
Description
No description was provided for this meeting.
If this is YOUR meeting, an easy way to fix this is to add a description to your video, wherever mtngs.io found it (probably YouTube).
A
B
A
So
it
won't
be
quite
the
production
when
you
watch
it
again
all
right.
We're
ready
for
one
item
scheduled
for
study
session
time
this
evening
of
the
continued
discussion
on
the
proposed
downtown,
livability
land
use
code
amendments
and
we're
hoping
we
can
get
this
work
through
and
and
move
on,
but
city
manager.
You
want
to
introduce
sheriff.
C
To
a
thank
you,
mayor
and
councilmembers
tonight
is
the
sixth
session
of
that
the
council
is
taking
up
the
livability
initiative
since
receiving
the
recommendation
from
the
Planning
Commission.
This
was
last
in
front
of
you
on
September
18th
liz's
was
approximately
two
weeks
ago.
We
are
returning
with
the
four
main
issue
for
issues
that
you
asked
us
to
bring
back
for
consideration
this
evening,
as
you
mentioned
mr.
Mara,
that
our
hope
is
that
we
get
final
directions
so
that
we
can
bring
back
a
formal
ordinance
and
two
weeks
from
now
on,
October
16th.
D
Brad,
so
we're
back
to
revisit
a
couple
of
issues
that
you've
had
some
some
discussions
on
here.
The
last
couple
of
study
sessions
on
this
topic
and
one
new
one
that
came
up
at
the
last
meeting
that
we've
tried
to
provide
you
some
additional
information
in
your
agenda
memo
this
evening.
What
we
would
intend
and
propose
for
the
council
is
to
walk
through
each
of
those
four
items
and
then
pause
at
the
end
of
each
one,
see
what
your
dialogue
is
see.
D
That's
a
discussion
of
councils
had
for
some
time
and
then
the
other
issue
that
we've
queued
up
for
you
tonight
is
the
term
trigger
height,
which
is
the
height
at
which
a
number
of
different
things
have
to
happen
in
the
downtown
zoning
ordinance,
specifically
relating
to
the
olb
Central
and
olb
south
districts.
That
was
a
topic
that
came
up
at
the
September
5th
meeting
that
we
brought
back
for
you
this
evening.
So
just
real,
quick
in
terms
of
timelines.
This
is
the
I
believe.
The
sixth
meeting
you've
now
had
on
a
series
of
subjects.
D
We've
tried
to
outline
those
for
you
this
evening.
I
talked
about
our
hope.
Is
that
if
there's
conclusion
with
the
council
tonight,
we'll
have
the
adoption
for
you
at
your
next
meeting
and
so
with
that
I
think
we'll
just
jump
right
in
and
I'll
hand
it
off
to
a
meal
to
start
with
the
floor.
Plate
reduction,
okay,.
E
So
the
first
topic
we
have
tonight
is
the
floor.
Plate
reduction
in
the
the
two
downtown
mu
districts,
which
are
downtown
mu
and
downtown
MU
Civic
Center,
as
well
as
the
the
two
of
the
three
downtown,
will
be
districts
which
are
the
central
and
downtown
will
be
south.
As
Mac
had
stated,
the
the
trigger
height
is
an
important
part
of
the
the
code
package.
It's
where,
when
developers
do
choose
to
exceed
that
trigger
height,
that
it
kicks
in
a
reduced
floor
plate
as
well
as
an
open
space
provision.
E
The
Planning
Commission
recommended
a
range
between
10
and
25%
reduction
for
council
to
study
and
make
a
final
decision
for
each
of
the
zones.
Just
as
a
reminder,
council
provided
earlier
direction
for
a
15%
reduction
in
the
downtown
o
1
and
O
2
districts
for
non-residential
and
a
10%
reduction
for
residential
in
all
zones.
The
options
that
we
have
up
there
on
the
screen
option.
One
retains
the
Planning
Commission
and
staffs
recommendation
for
a
10%
for
plate
reduction
for
the
the
zones
in
question
option.
E
So
with
that,
we
wanted
to
hand
it
over
to
Council
for
discussion.
We
did
have
one
slide,
that
supplements
information
that
we
provided
in
the
previous
council
meeting.
So
from
the
left
going
towards
the
right.
We
have
examples
of
office
projects
in
the
16700
square,
foot
range
and
Austin
all
the
way
up
to
example,
projects
in
the
B
greater
than
20,000
square
foot
range.
So
we
have
20,000
and
22,000
square
foot
by
example.
So
this
is
just
meant
to
show
that
there
there
are
viable,
feasible
office
developments
of
all
sizes,
our
economic
development
group.
A
F
Had
some
really
good
examples
of
buildings,
all
of
which
were
about
twenty
four
thousand
square
foot
floor
plates
and
it
was
an
email
from
welcome
ya
from
Vulcan
about
the
needs
of
the
tech
saying
that
20,000
is
even
too
small
to
24,000
needed,
but
nonetheless
that
I
just
want
to
make
sure
some
people
see
those
visuals.
Maybe
we
can
even
put
it
up
on
the
screen,
but
I
had
asked
for
this.
I'd
asked
for
the
safe
harbor
because
of
the
information
we
were
getting
from
the
industry.
F
So
I
would
very
much
like
to
see
option
two
I
think.
Last
time
we
discussed
this.
There
were
three
of
us
in
that
camp
and
three,
not
in
that
camp.
So
I
just
wanted
to
go
on
the
record
to
say
I'm
still
in
that
camp.
I
still
think
we
should
create
that
safe
harbor
so
that
we
can
make
sure
that
developers
now
people
want
to
build
something.
F
F
F
Happiness
well,
I,
don't
know
if
I
came
up
with
that,
okay,
but
it
doesn't
matter,
it's
just
a
description
of
a
minimum
that
we
won't
force
them
to
go
below
the
20,000
if
they
don't
want
to,
and
if
they
find
that
it
would
be
cheaper
for
them
to
neck
it
in
further
and
have
a
different
design,
they're
free
to
do
that.
But
we
wouldn't
force
them
to
build
something
that
wouldn't
be
what
the
market
needs.
A
F
B
B
So
you
know
if,
if
it
is
a
to
me,
the
thing
is
this:
if
it
is,
if
you
are
developing
a
building
and
you
don't
want
to
go
below
20,000,
don't,
but
you
develop
to
a
certain
height
and
you're
allowed
to
do
that.
If
you
want
to
develop
to
a
height
over
that,
then
you
need
to
drop
down
and
I
think
we're
asking
for
actually
a
very
small
reduction
by
10
percent
on
this
and
I
think
this
is
something
the
Planning
Commission
dealt
with
I'm
good
with
their
recommendation.
I
G
J
They
want
to
build
so
I'm,
not
a
big
player
for
three
just
to
be
clear
with
option
two.
You
know
the
problem
I
have
is
I.
Think
deputy
mayor,
Tom
Knox
had
just
said
it.
It's
a
small
reduction
and
I
agree
with
that,
and
that's
one
of
those
things
that
could
be
argued
both
ways
but
I
think
we're
kind
of
losing.
The
point,
which
is
we
want
buildings
that
are
architectural
II
interesting.
We
want
things
that
people
will
look
at
and
go
wow.
J
That's
that's
a
cool
skyline
in
Bellevue
and
right
kind
of
coming
down
is
we
want
these
buildings
to
be
economically
viable?
We
want
them
to
fit
the
needs
of
the
businesses
that
we're
trying
to
attract
to
Bellevue
and,
for
the
most
part,
we're
talking
about
high
tech
types
of
companies
and
we're
trying
to
develop
something
that
on
the
outside
is
interesting
and
really
again
gets
to
that
wow
factor
now
requiring
developers
to
neck
in
the
10%
above
the
trigger
I
to
me
does
not
ensure
that
we
achieve
that
goal.
J
You
know,
and
sometimes
I
think
you
got
to
put
aside
the
the
fear
or
the
suspicion
that
if
we
don't
necessarily
tell
the
developers
point
by
point
exactly
how
things
have
to
be
done,
we
won't
get
what
we
want.
Sometimes
you
have
to
give
them
the
framework
and
believe
that
it's
in
their
best
interest
to
do
things
that
are
right
for
the
city
as
well
and
I,
know
I've
heard
the
arguments
of
well.
What
about
the
carpetbaggers?
J
The
people
come
in
from
outside
the
town
to
build
some
tall
rectangle
and
then
take
their
money
and
move
on
sure
that
that's
a
possibility
in
life.
You
know
I've
been
around
Bellevue
long
enough
to
know
that
there's
a
lot
of
local
developers
who
stay
and
develop
and
do
the
right
things
and
so
I
do
believe.
J
Yes
and
you
know-
and
you
know
I-
think
I
like
the
term
safe
harbor,
because,
as
you
pointed
out,
you're
not
required
to
not
go
below
20,000.
If
you
want
to
develop
something
and
the
upper
floors
are
gonna,
be
less
than
20,
that's
I
would
say
that
it
as
a
developer's
option
and
opportunity
we're
just
not
going
to
force
them
to
do
that.
I.
B
A
G
I
still
have
confidence
with
our
staff
and
the
designers
who,
in
our
city,
that
3
to
me
is
a
good
option.
I
mean
I'd
love
to
see
people
not
have
to
step
back
if
they
don't
want
to
our
builders,
but
but
in
exchange
we
get
a
beautiful
design
and
I
I,
like
the
combination
combination
of
one
and
three,
because
it
gives
you
number
two
with
a
good
design.
So
if
you
and
that
email
that
we
got
that
I
I
was
wondering
if
sandy
was
gonna,
bring
us
a
copy
of
it.
G
F
A
K
K
A
K
Number:
two:
okay:
okay,
any
reduction
will
not
go
below
twenty
thousand
scraping
floor
plates
because
I
think
our
goal
is
to
keep
the
goodies
of
different
variable.
You
know
iconic
and
we're
not
gonna.
Do
it
it's
the
developer,
that's
gonna
do
it
and
they
don't
have
to
do
anything
they
don't
want
to,
especially
if
they
cannot
do
it.
You
cannot
make
like
it's
not
gonna
happen,
so
they
have
to
be
economical,
have
to
be
feasible.
The
the
one
that's
gonna
make
it
and
so
alternately.
K
That's
what
could
rescue
at
the
end
and
I
believe
that
the
twenty
thousand
feet,
something
even
bigger
than
that
is
the
feasible-
cannot
make
a
way
to
do
that.
We
know
expert,
so
I
believe
that,
obviously,
like
somebody
said
you
could
make
it
abuse
whatever,
but
it
could
be
done.
Anybody
can
and
we
rely
and
depend
on
the
if
it
doesn't
work.
Well,
it's
I'm
going
to
attract
people
to
to
go
there.
You
know
so
it's
a
market
economics.
It's
developer,
so
number
two.
A
So
we
know
understand
what
I
mean
things
have
been
said
on
all
sites
of
it.
Yes,
we
could
just
save
developers
you.
This
is
your
framework
and
just
we
hope
you
do
good
buildings
or
whatever,
and
if
you
don't
okay,
it's
okay,
nobody
will,
you
know,
buy
the
building
or
move
into
it,
but
we're
stuck
with
a
building.
That's
not
doesn't
contribute
to
downtown
ability
to
look
I
mean
there's.
This
is
a
competing
thing
of.
A
What
are
we
trying
to
reach
here,
and
it
is
interesting
in
these
four
played
examples
of
actually
the
two
buildings
I
mean
this
is
the
one
in
and
Austin's
really
cool,
that's
different,
the
the
other
to
the
Midtown
and
Madison
they're
over
twenty
thousand
square
feet.
I
guess
is
that
right.
The
plates
are.
A
J
I
have
a
question
because
what
three
years
ago
and
we
started
this
in
the
CAC-
we
talked
a
lot
about.
How
can
we
describe
without
prescribing
what
the
city
goals
for
building
and
aesthetics
are?
Are
how
what
we
want
it
to
be
like
so
maybe
Mac,
you
know,
can
you
guys
talk
a
little
bit
about
what
is
in
this
already
that
kind
of
guides
the
developers
into
creating
something
that
we
truly
are
looking
for
in.
E
Our
city
right
so
I
think
one
part.
That's
often
forgotten
is
the
the
tremendous
amount
of
work
the
Planning
Commission
did
on
kind
of
updating
the
design
guidelines.
So
those
those
are
the
mechanism
that
we
do
administrative
design
review
for
pretty
much
every
project
in
downtown
and
when
we
started
they
were
kind
of
there
were
in
six
or
seven
different
places.
They
had
been
updated
at
various
times
over
the
past
35
years.
So
a
nice
body
of
work
in
the
current
code
is
the
whole
set
of
design
guidelines.
E
That
applies
to
all
development,
whether
or
not
it's
exceeding
the
trigger
height
or
not,
and
it
talks
about
interesting
reform
about
a
lot
of
things
on
the
the
pedestrian
realm
being
livable
and
memorable.
So
those
applied,
regardless
of
if
you
go
over
the
trigger
height
or
not
so
I,
think
we
are
going
to
get
continued
to
get
good
development
downtown
and
hopefully
raise
the
bar
for
for
all
development.
The
the
trigger
height
is
really
honing
in
on
when
we
are
allowing
additional
height
in
our
downtown,
which
we
are
in
in
actually
most
zones.
E
What
the
trade-off
is
for
that
additional
height
and
the
two
things
that
both
the
CAC
and
the
Planning
Commission
came
up
with
were
reduced
floor
plates
so
having
taller
more
slender
towers
and
the
ground-level
open
space
that
the
average
person
could
enjoy.
So
that
really
that's
that's!
What
we're
trying
to
continue?
The
discussion
is,
what's
the
what's,
the
trade-off
for
the
additional
height
and
so.
J
E
L
So
some
of
the
design
guidelines
speak
directly
to
that
there
are
building
design
guidelines
that
speak
to
the
base,
the
middle
and
the
top
of
the
building.
There
are
examples
that
are
provided
in
the
design
guidelines
and,
as
we
have
done
with
other
provisions
in
the
cut
in
the
code,
we
also
create
public
information.
J
L
The
I
would
say
the
skeleton
of
the
building
can't
be
taken
in
isolation,
so
a
building
that
is
a
complete
rectangle
can
be
beautiful
as
a
result
of
the
fenestration,
the
material
that
is
used,
the
essentially
the
type
of
window
walls
they're
employed.
So
you
can't
just
essentially
say
the
skeleton
is
the
only
reason
that
makes
design.
In
fact,
the
design
guidelines
focus
more
on
materiality
and
the
way
the
building
is
skinned.
L
L
B
B
B
G
Jennifer
and
councilmember
Robertson
I
keep
referencing
an
email
that
was
sent
by
Vulcan
and
I'm.
Just
gonna
read
a
description
of
land
use
codes
that
were
utilized
to
create
the
design
of
to
Union
Square.
My
favorite
building
in
Seattle
I
knew
the
architect
and
he
didn't
complain,
design
tower
to
provide
visual
interest
in
articulation,
create
another
one
is
create
an
attractive
building,
silhouettes
and
roof
lines,
and
the
third
one
was
use
architectural
and
landscape
elements
to
emphasize
gateways.
So
it's
not
really
constraining
I.
Think
and
you
came
with
a
beautiful
up
with
a
beautiful
building.
G
L
A
G
C
B
B
Even
so
you
production-
and
so
this
is
where
I'm
getting
into
the
issue
of
the
smaller
building
very
calm
and
the
smaller
floor
plate
I,
just
like
I,
say,
I
think
what
councilmember
Robinson
suggested.
First,
one
combined
number
one
with
the
guidelines
that
we
have
that
are
in
the
proposed
plan,
along
with
a
statement
that
there
can
be
a
safe
harbor
for
art
or
a
a
a
way
for
a
developer
to
keep
at
20,000.
If
that
10%
step
fact
goes
beyond
that,
but
you
really
do
have
to
have
exceedingly
interesting
architecture.
B
F
G
F
B
Know
no
one
is
the
one:
is
the
10%
set
right?
So
if
you
build
a
20,000
square-foot
base,
you've
got
to
take
in
10%
setback
reduction.
Excuse
me,
unless
you
can
show
this
exemplary,
which
is
more
than
what
our
land
use
code.
That
means
going
beyond
what
the
requirements
of
of
the
code
that
would
be,
and
but
if
you
can
do
that,
then
you
can
stay
at
the
twenty
thousand
and
I
also
think
that
there
is
an
issue.
Here
again
we
are
raising
Heights.
B
A
J
So
I'm
not
opposed
to
a
combination
of
one
and
three.
My
concern
is
twofold:
I
think
number
three
may
create
a
hurdle
that
is
unclear
about
I
we've
just
spent
three
years
defining
what
we
want
our
downtown
to
look
like
as
developers
develop,
buildings
and
I
I
happen
to
be
of
the
mind
that
we've
put
in
a
lot
of
work
to
clearly,
or
at
least
as
clearly
as
possible,
define
what
is
truly
outstanding
architecture.
To
start
with.
That's
we
want
every
building
to
have
outstanding
architecture
and
then
so
to
say
you
know
what.
J
J
I'm
just
concerned
that
if
we
say
you
know
it
has
to
be
really
outstanding
without
having
a
clear
definition
of
that,
because
we've
spent
a
lot
of
time
defining
call
it
a
minimum
standard.
If
you
want.
But
it's
a
pretty
high
minimum
standard
in
my
book,
and
so
we're
already
going
to
get
good-looking
buildings
and
so
to
get
a
building.
That
looks
even
better
than
the
really
good-looking
buildings
we're
trying
to
get.
M
F
To
me,
looking
at
what
we've
done
under
the
draft
code,
even
with
option
two,
there
still
would
be
a
necking
in
at
the
first
trigger
height,
and
they
also
would
be
subject
to.
If
they
are
limitations,
they
would
be
subject
to
all
the
design
guidelines
which
the
Vulcan
was
arguing
for
bigger
floor
plates,
but
they
also
gave
the
examples
of
how
some
of
these
larger
beautiful
buildings
to
meet
our
design
guidelines,
so
I
think
that
it's
still
pertinent
to
this
discussion.
F
Should
he
choose
to
was
an
advocate
for
20,000
square-foot,
safe
harbor,
so
that
would
put
us
at
four
council
members.
Should
he
come
and
participate
in
this
discrete
decision
at
being
there,
and
so
to
me
it
makes
sense
for
us
to
go
ahead
and
move
forward
with
the
draft
code
with
the
safe
harbor.
We
have
three
council
members
who
are
firm
on
that,
not
three
who
are
firm
on
the
other
options
and
a
fourth
that
could
participate.
Who
would
be
on
the
option
to
so
I'd
like
to
move
on
on
that
with
my
colleagues.
A
A
B
G
D
So
government
should
set
minimum
expectations
and
that's
it.
So
it's
been
my
experience
that
most
developers
come
in
and
start
from
a
place
of.
This
is
what
I
have
to
do
right
so
give
me
a
permit
and
they
they
see
anything
else.
That's
moving
back
instead
of
the
incentive
that
you're
trying
to
describe.
Well,
you
get
this.
D
G
B
F
So
could
I
just
suggest
then,
because
I
do
want
to
take
action
on
this
one
sixteenth,
that
it
come
forward
with
an
option
one
and
an
option
to
alternatives
inside
the
draft,
and
we
can
just
cross
out
the
wrong.
So.
B
I
I,
actually
this
this
gets
to
just
legislative
procedure
in
the
way
we
have
always
worked.
If
there
is
not
a
majority
of
the
council
that
gives
direction
it's
the
Planning
Commission
recommendation
that
comes
to
us,
that's
always
been
the
way
and
there's
an
option
to
change
it,
and
I
would
and
I
would
be
100%
in
favor
of
an
amendment
being
drafted.
That
would
do
precisely
that
to
get
to
the
safe
harbor
I'd
be
a
hundred
percent
in
favor
of
an
amendment
being
drafted
that
would
get
to
one
in
three.
So.
B
B
F
B
The
ten
percent,
ten
percent
I'm
sorry
a
range,
a
step
back,
I,
always
hate
using
whatever
term
is
correct,
but
ten
to
twenty
five
percent
was
the
recommendation
of
the
Planning
Commission.
So
if
we're
gonna
do
anything,
we
would
come
in
with
a
ordinance
again
following
the
procedure.
We
have
always
followed
in
the
time
that
I've
been
on
this
council.
It
would
come
in
with
a
range
from
ten
to
twenty
five
and
we
would
make
the
choice.
I
really
thought
I
heard
a
majority
of
council
members
say
it
should
be
no
more
than
ten.
B
That's
right,
which
I
believed
was
direction.
However,
everybody
reserves
the
right
to
change
their
mind.
I'm
just
trying
to
get
a
package
before
us.
That's
manageable
and
doesn't
have
multiple.
It
has
multiple
amendments
but
doesn't
have
the
ordinance
to
6
4
3,
a
and
2
6
4
3
B
and
2
6
4
3
C
and
2
6
4
3
D.
That's
what
I'm
really
trying
to
avoid.
K
K
K
B
During
we're
planning
to
the
Planning
Commission
specifically
decided,
there
would
not
be
a
safe
harbor
that
there
would
be
a
reduction
of
between
ten
and
twenty
five
percent.
That
was,
let
me
put
it.
Let
me
stop.
Planning
Commission
doesn't
decide
anything
Planning,
Commission
rating
recommendation
exactly.
A
E
Topic
two
is
the
trigger
height
in
the
old
East
Central
and
OB
South.
So
this
is
the
area
between
112th
Avenue
and
I
405
between
Main
Street
and
North
East,
8th
Street,
there's
two
zones
there
and
the
staff
and
Planning
Commission
recommendations
are
consistent.
There
115
feet
as
the
non-residential
trigger
height,
and
it
was
asked
at
the
September
18th
meeting
that
we
bring
back
for
discussion,
a
concept
that
raises
that
same
trigger
height
to
150
feet,
so
we're
here
bringing
that
back
for
your
discussion.
E
This
is
just
a
quick
graphic
to
show
the
the
changes
this.
This
was
one
of
the
the
areas
that
clearly
is
a
adjacent
to
our
new
light
rail
stations
and
did
have
the
fairly
significant
increases
in
FA
are
in
height
from
maxes
of
three
to
five
and
six
from
an
FA.
Our
perspective
and
height
increases
there,
as
you
can
see
from
in
the
87
foot
range
up
to
230
and
400
feet,
not
necessarily
as
goals
but
maximum
Heights
that
you
could
do
down
in
that
area.
E
There's
a
couple
more
graphics,
and
this
is
a
on
the
left
hand
side.
You
can
see
in
a
kind
of
a
conceptual
framework
here
when
you
have
a
trigger
height
at
115
feet
and
we're
to
do
150
foot
tall
office
buildings
over
a
podium
that
would
have
these
different
reductions
in
floor
plate
that
are
shown
down
they're
in
the
lower-left,
as
well
as
the
ground-level
open
space.
E
If
you
were
to
have
the
same
height
buildings
that
is
150
feet
at
a
five
FA
are
there
is
the
potential
to
not
have
the
open
space
requirement
triggered
and
and
have
potentially
thirty
thousand
and
twenty
thousand
twenty
five
thousand
square
foot
floor
plates
going
up
to
the
150
foot
level.
So
again
the
Planning
Commission
staff
recommendation
on
the
the
left.
E
What
would
be
up
for
discussion
on
the
on
the
right
got
two
more
and
then
these
are
zoomed
out
a
little
bit,
but
it
essentially
shows
that
Main
Street
and
North
East
fourth
area
with
the
graphics
that
we
just
showed.
Clearly,
this
is
contemplating
two
office
towers
per
block.
Maxing
out,
the
FA
are
again
with
the
trigger
height
115
150,
and
then
we
just
have
one
more
graphic
Carol,
and
this
is
zoomed
out
a
little
bit
from
roughly
northeast
forth,
approximately
looking
back
towards
Main,
Street
and
northeast
six,
so
that
same
ol
will
be
area.
E
L
L
G
L
B
There
is
one
situation
in
here
that
I
think
we
might
want
to
come
back
to
later
might
be
two
situations,
and
that
is
something
that
is
triggered.
Councilmember
Robinson
just
brought
this
up,
but
it
might
not
be
affordable
housing,
but
something
that
is
a
public
benefit
that
might
be
able
to
allow
for
and
for
some
form
of
exemption
to
this
or
some
form
of
different
treatment
on
it.
I
will
say:
I
sit
on
the
maiden
Bower
board,
and
so
you
know
we
are
very
interested
in
a
headquarters
hotel.
B
There
are
hotels
in
projects
that
are
planned
to
the
west
of
the
of
the
center.
There's
been
discussion
in
in
here
about
a
hotel
project
that
would
actually
potentially
connect
and
I'd
be
willing
at
some
point
in
time
to
consider
some
some
adjustments
for
a
project
that
does
that,
but,
frankly,
again,
I
think
when
you
look
at
the
graphics
that
you
showed
us,
you
know
I
go
back
to
the
build
the
wall
champ.
This
is
we
do
not
want
to
have
that
section.
A
F
A
L
L
Right,
this
ish
topic
came
up
on
September,
18,
I,
believe
and
the
council
did
ask
some
questions
with
regard
to
the
linear
buffer.
Although
the
question
was
answered
for
the
most
part,
it
did
cause
staff
to
go
back
and
look
at
the
linear
buffer
quite
carefully
and
how
we
had
crafted
the
regulations
that
essentially
describe
how
the
linear
buffer
needs
to
be
developed.
L
As
part
of
that,
we
did
find
that
there
was
potentially
an
unintended
consequence
of
regarding
the
way
that
we
had
drafted
the
Planning
Commission
recommendation
for
your
consideration
and
so
the
current
code
version.
As
you
know,
measures
from
the
back
of
curb
in
perimeter,
district
overlay
a2
and
it
measures
from
the
back
of
sidewalk
in
a1.
L
The
problem
with
the
measurement
of
the
back
at
the
back
of
curve
without
doing
some
additional
cleanup
in
that
section
is,
is
that
there
was
a
also
a
hard
scape
limitation
and
once
the
sidewalk
is
located
within
the
linear
buffer,
it
exceeds
the
hardscape
limitation.
As
a
result,
staff
is
recommending
some
modifications
to
achieve
the
intended
outcome
that
was
recommended
by
the
Planning
Commission
to
essentially
eliminate
the
hardscape
provision
from
the
areas
of
the
linear
buffer.
Where
we
measure
from
the
back
of
so
I.
B
Believe
I
was
the
one
that
raised
this
question.
We
had
a
very
good
discussion
on
Miss,
Helen
and
I
and
I.
Actually,
I
was
really
thinking
more
in
terms
of
the
buffer
that
is
just
south
of
North
East
State.
But
having
that
discussion
having
these
changes,
understanding
the
properties
that
are
there
I'm
I'm
good,
with
the
way
it
was
drafted,
number.
G
L
J
F
L
A
J
I'm
I'm,
okay,
I
would
just
like
ask
a
clarifying
question
because
Planning
Commission
looked
at
a
lot
of
stuff
and
I
just
would
ask
everyone
to
go
kind
of
back
and
ask
the
question
of
how
did
this
not
get
caught
until
it
got
to
this
point,
because
you
know
we're
relying
a
lot
on
the
Planning
Commission
to
have
vetted
all
this
stuff
as
well
as
staff
and
then
there's
the
old
thing
about.
It
gets
passed.
J
State
commission
and
then
staff
changes
something
and
yes,
even
if
we
all
agree
I
just
want
to
make
sure
people
don't
feel
like
well,
you
know
Planning
Commission
at
something.
Then
staff
came
and
changed
it,
and
then
we
looked
at
and
said
yeah.
That's
that's
cool,
Planning
Commission's!
This
should
have
gotten
caught
a
lot
earlier
and
I
hope
you
folks
kind
of
go
back
and
ask.
How
could
we
have
caught
this
earlier
and
made
sure
that
it
got
resolved
with
the
Planning
Commission's
endorsement?
Sure.
L
J
L
O
L
Topic
with
respect
to
raising
the
trigger
height
this
month
was
one
that
was
requested
by
one
councilmember
to
come
back
for
additional
discussion.
The
prior
direction
that
we
received
from
the
City
Council
was
to
in-state
the
reinstate
the
Planning
Commission
recommendation
of
20
feet:
foot
setbacks
for
the
towers
from
interior
property
lines
on
residential.
Do
you
remember
the
there
was
some
consideration
by
the
council
to
go
to
30
feet
and
then
the
20
foot
interior
property
line
setback
was
reinstated
for
non-resident
for
residential
towers.
G
Speak
to
that,
since
this
is
my
idea
I,
you
know
we
have
a
lot
of
developers
in
the
room
who
live
with
their
work
and
I
have
no
doubt
that
they
would
do
what
we
call.
The
right
thing
is
create
as
much
separation
and
design
as
possible
to
give
make
a
very
good
product.
But
if
you
look
at
ownership
of
property
downtown,
there
is
a
lot
of
foreign
investment
and
there's
just
no
indicator
to
me
that
people
are
going
to
do
anything
other
than
build
the
maximum
for
the
least
amount
of
money.
G
In
that
situation
and
I'm
really
trying
to
create
living
situations
that
are
going
to
be
desirable
for
people.
We
because,
as
we
grow,
there's
gonna
be
more
people
moving
out
of
single-family
homes
in
the
downtown
and
more
people
moving
into
downtown.
So
that
is
my
my
goal
in
doing
this,
but
I
think
it
also
offers
the
flexibility
that,
if
you
can't
do
it,
then
you
don't
have
to
if
it's,
if
it's
a
property
that
doesn't
allow
for
a
30
foot
setback
tower
setback,
then
you
don't
have
to
do
it.
So
I
I,
like
this
I.
B
K
Have
a
clarification
for
councilmember
Robinson.
She
mentioned
that
she's
concerned
about
foreign
investment,
with
no
consideration
of
how
we
live
here.
I
think
that
we
need
to
be
careful
that
we
are
clear,
I
mean
what
we
mean,
I,
don't
think
we
can
differentiate.
You
know
for
investment
period
as
to
their
respect
for
quality
of
life
in
the
City
of
Bellevue.
G
G
B
Think
she
was
including
California
in
that
as
well.
Well,
you've
been
dead,
I,
actually
I
actually
read
it's
not
necessarily
where
the
investment
comes
from.
It
is
the
invest
door
and
I
also
agree
that
we've
got
people
who
have
done
magnificent
development
here
in
Bellevue
and
that
they
want
to
do
that
and
they
most
likely
have
used
money
from
all
over
the
world
to
do
money.
K
A
Well,
I
think
it's
that
balance
we
like
to
talk
about.
We
have
a
lot
of
local
developers
and
they're
very
committed
to
making
solution
both
city
and
obviously
we
can't
really
peg
every
human
being
in
a
certain
way.
You're
gonna
have
a
mix
and
we
had.
We
have
a
really
neat
development
going
up
close
to
here.
That's
somebody
from
Canada
and
they
seem
to
be
doing
a
really
great
job.
A
So
it's
just
hard
to
make
those
judgments
on
that
based
on
where
they
come
from
that
so
we're
just
trying
to
so
that
every
developer
has
a
good
sense
of
what
we
want.
That's
the
whole
point
of
the
downtown
livability
piece
and
have
some
guidelines.
So
the
question
is
so:
what
does
this
really
mean
this?
This
option
of
30
foot
setback
above
80
feet
reduced
to
20
feet
and
how
would
that
play
out?
How
many?
How
many
properties
are
we
talking
about?
A
L
L
B
So
I
heard
last
I
forget
when
we
last
discussed
this
last
discussing
it.
I
heard
four
people
on
this
council
very
much
in
favor
of
keeping
the
forty
I
was
supportive
of
I'm
supportive
of
councilmember
Robinson's
idea
on
here.
As
you
know,
I've
brought
forward
a
couple
of
different
proposals.
This
is
a
little
bit
of
a
hybrid
of
one
of
those
ones
that
I
talked
about
what's
down,
but
if
there
are
four
votes
that
are
for
the
40
or
the
40
feet,
the
2020,
then
we
added-
and
that
is
the
Planning
Commission
recommendation
right.
F
K
The
reason
I
respect
the
privacy
thing
with
Robinson,
and
that
be
me,
but
I
think
there's
I
hope
that
this
opportunity
is
that
if
it
gets,
if
we
follow
20
foot
setback,
if
it
doesn't
work,
doesn't
work
right.
Number
two
I
think
the
developer
should
be
smart
enough
not
to
develop
that
kind
of
buildings,
and
if
they
don't,
maybe
we
can
make
suggestions.
They
can
create
more
privacy
space
like
you
suggested
they
don't
face
each
other.
They
face
different
angles,
I,
don't
know.
Why
do
we
have
any
leverage
to
do
that?
G
K
A
J
So
I'm,
actually,
okay
with
number
one
but
I,
do
have
a
question
in
regards
to
the
number
two,
because
it's
to
me
it's
an
intriguing
concept
and
I'm
all
for
creating
more
more
privacy,
more
intimate
feeling
these
buildings,
if
at
all
possible.
So
my
question
is:
is
this
if
we
went
with
number
one
with
the
20
foot
setback?
J
Number
two:
it
says
you
know
you
can
go
to
20
feet
with
departure
from
criteria
and
Ellen
was
talking
about
curvilinear
buildings,
how
you
position
them
and
stuff.
So
basically,
what
we're
saying
is
we
chose
number
two.
You
could
still
end
up
with
buildings,
20
feet
off
the
interior
lines,
provided
they
met
certain
criteria.
So
if
that
criteria
truly
is
you
know,
first-class
design
standards
shouldn't
we
be
looking
at
incorporated
incorporating
that
into
our
codes
and
allow
people
to
build
the
20
feet
but
require
them
to
use
those
techniques.
L
P
L
A
And
this
is
this
is
I
mean
it's
a
good
discussion,
it's
a
long
discussion
and
I
think
to
some
extent
the
Planning
Commission
talked
about
this.
I
have
some
concerns
along
those
lines
of
the
last
in
here
it
doesn't.
When
you
start
talking
about,
doesn't
affect
light
air
and
privacy
of
users
propose
towers.
That's
that's
in
the
eye
of
the
beholder
on
that
one
like
I,
think
what
you're
talking
about
is
is
something
we
need
to.
We
can
work
on
how
you
get.
A
There
is
another
question,
and
that
would
take
us
going
back
probably
to
the
Planning
Commission
and
having
a
whole
discussion
back
to
port,
but
we
do
have
some
buildings
that
are
being
put
up
or
already
put
up
now
on
that
are
actually
pretty
cool
and
disturber
linear
or
have
different
facades
on
the
thing
so
part
of
its
just
again
and
having
the
expectations
and
I
think
with
the
department
working
with
them
on
the
plans
encourage
people
to
do
something.
That's
going
to
be
attractive
and
the
more
attractive
buildings
they
have.
A
B
Q
L
L
Let
us
know
on
number
one
what
you
would
expect
to
on
the
16th
so
that
we
can
provide
that
to
you
for
your
final
approval,
so
that
gets
to
is,
are
either
making
a
decision
on
item
one
or
essentially
giving
us
some
direction
as
to
whether
you
would
like
to
see
different
ordinances.
An
ordinance
with
that
distinction
identified,
which
is
the
one
I'm
talking
about,
is
the
building
for
plate
reduction.
Well,.
A
F
R
B
B
F
A
B
You
know
what
just
do
it
just
do
it
that
way.
Do
it
that
way,
we
don't
typically
do
it
that
way,
but
do
it
that
way
and
I
think
that
that
that's
fine,
the
problem
with
doing
it.
That
way
is
for
people
who
this
is
a
major
issue
for
them.
They
have
to
vote
against
the
ordinance,
not
against
the
issue
and
the
only
reason
we
have
to
do
that
I
mean
John
I,
just
I
I
really
wish
you
just
wish.
A
I
wish
some
other
people
would
make
up
their
mind
in
a
different
way.
So
I,
don't
I,
understand
what
you're
saying,
but
I
I
still
have
some
questions.
This
is
a
this
is
a
huge
decision
and
I.
Don't
think.
There's
anything
we're
all
going
to
take
another
week
and
coming
back
from
this
and
we'll
go
forward,
I
mean
I
could
say
something
now
and
then
come
back
next
week.
I
guess
and
argue
the
other
side
I
don't
know.
Could.
B
Would
that
that
would
be
the
maximum
that
you
would
have
to
step
back
to
and
those
would
be
the
two
ordinances
the
problem
with
that
is,
if
that
second
one
is,
if
you
get
into
this,
you
get
into
where
we
look
the
worst,
which
is
by
especially
because
we're
in
six
people
where
somebody
is
making
a
motion
to
put
in
ordinance
a
before
the
council,
then
you
have
a
substitute
Dubey.
Then
you
have
a
sub
sub
sub
substitute
to
do.
B
C,
and
you
just
are
your
you're
looking
awful
and
you're,
essentially
saying
yes
or
no
to
this.
So
if
it
is
a
big
deal
for
you,
the
only
way
you
can
vote
is
know
if
that
ordinance
comes
and
you're
voting
no
on
the
entire
package,
and
that's
why
I
believe
you
would
be,
but
we
would
be
better
off
by
coming
back.
Mr.
B
A
F
B
A
This
is
the
problem
we're
gonna,
one
side
wants
to
have,
there
is
put
forward
first
and
then
somebody
has
to
amend
it
and
the
other
side
wants
to
reverse.
So
we
actually
do
some
I
have
two
separate
media
ordinances
come
forth
and
we
choose
one
or
the
other
and
you
just
vote
against
it,
which
are
your
just
voting
because
of
Pisa
absolutely
and
then
you
vote
for
it
because
of
a
piece
on
the
other.
I,
don't
see,
that's
any
problem,
we're
just
going
to
come
up
and
it's
the
same
thing.
We
were
doing
right
here.
A
A
J
B
J
A
J
G
P
G
D
I'll
give
some
big-picture
thoughts
and
Kara
can
speak
to
some
of
the
things
you
drafted
for
you.
If
there's
a
desire
from
the
council
to
see
an
option
that
tries
to
get
as
specific
as
possible
for
what
exemplary
design
means,
we
can
certainly
spend
some
time
and
bring
you
back
some
alternative
language
that
would
contemplate
that
and
we
can
spend
some
time
refining
what
miss
Helland
has
already
spent
time
working
on
to
see.
If
that
satisfies
your
needs,
if
that's
a
desire,
they
counsel
to
consider
that
continue.
I
should
say
that's
that
dialogue.
L
N
L
Sixteenth
and
then
we
will
be
having
it
again
in
November.
I
know
everyone
is
interested
in
being
done.
So
with
that
in
mind,
the
two
options:
there
are
two
options
before
you
to
create
two
different
ordinances
or
to
create
an
ordinance,
basically
with
the
the
Planning
Commission
recommendation
and
amending
language,
so
those
are
kind
of
the
two
options
at
this
point.
B
So
let
me
just
suggest
this
I
prefer
what
the
latter
I
think.
Others
prefer
the
double
ordinance.
There's
another
option:
that's
to
not
have
the
language
in
the
ordinance
and
then
you
so
the
language
developing.
This
would
not
be
in
the
ordinance
that
would
be
developed,
but
there
would
be
three
separate
sections
that
would
put
that
language
into
the
ordinance
and
we
can
have
individual
votes
on
that.
F
B
It's
right
there
before
us
and
if
we're
in
a
situation
where
it's
three
to
three
and
and
three
to
three.
If,
let's
just
say
somebody
votes
for
number
one,
and
it
only
gets
three
votes,
it's
not
in
somebody
put
safe
harbor
in
front
of
us.
It
only
gets
three
votes.
It's
not
in
somebody
puts
departure
from
reduction
or
whatever
the
combination
in
it
only
gets
three
votes.
It's
not
in
and
we
have
to
solve
it.
A
F
I'm,
okay,
to
have
the
two
alternatives,
which
is
what
I
was
support
about
yeah.
This
would
be
a
little
unusual
to
have
a
section
of
code.
I
can't
remember
because
my
clothes,
my
laptop
whatever
it
is
20
whatever
of
and
habits,
say
TBD
or
something
in
the
ordinance
and
then
in
the
council
packet.
It
would
say
section:
bla,
bla,
bla
option.
One
option
two
option:
three
yeah.
So
then
the
process
is
I
would
understand
it.
F
If
someone
would
mood
option
of
ordinance,
you
know
17:56
whatever
the
number
is
with
option
A
or
they
could
just
move
the
ordinance
and
then
I
move
to
amend
it
by
adding
option
a
it's
just
a
two
step
process,
rather
than
trying
to
see
who
gets
called
on
first
to
move
the
first
ordinance
that
I
wasn't
trying
to
have
gamesmanship
on
I.
Just
didn't
want
to
have
a
default
where,
if
we
tied
it
would
go
forward
with
one
or
the
other,
so
I
think
we
should
get
need
to
get
to
a
decision.
F
A
F
F
A
A
F
I
A
A
B
Morning
I
know
was
a
tough
morning
for
all
of
us.
I
have
a
habit
of
waking
up
in
the
morning
and
checking
my
Twitter
feed
very
early.
It's
also
the
way
I
shut
off
my
alarm
clock,
and
usually
it's
just
full
of
political
news
and
when
I
opened
it
this
morning,
I
just
saw
a
number
of
tweets
about
Las,
Vegas
and
I
knew
again
that
something
had
gone
terribly
wrong
and
it
did
I
know
when
we
came
in
tonight.
The
death
toll
was
at
59
and
there
were
more
than
400
people
who
were
injured.
B
I
heard
an
interview
tonight
or
this
afternoon
from
someone
who
was
part
of
the
the
band
or
the
the
the
music
that
was
playing
there,
and
he
said
something
that
that
really
stuck
with
me.
It
is
really
sad
that
it
takes
the
worst
in
America
to
bring
out
the
best
in
America
and
I
thought
that
was
very
poignant.
So
I
know
that
our
hearts,
our
prayers.
Our
thoughts
are
with
all
of
the
victims
in
Las
Vegas,
also
with
those
who
were
the
first
responders.
B
T
A
A
We're
joined
this
evening
by
representatives
from
the
schools
and
I'm
going
to
invite
the
group
up
following
the
proclamation
I'll
ask
Jeanine
thorn
a
PTA
member
and
lead
parent
volunteer
for
walk
to
school
day
for
our
more
elementary
to
introduce
the
students
and
attendance.
So
I'll
go
ahead
and
read
the
proclamation,
and
then
we
can
come
up
and
get
some
pictures
and
I
have
a
copy
of
the
proclamation
for
everybody.
Here.
Copies,
ok,
City
of
Bellevue
Washington
proclamation,
whereas
all
children
benefit
when
communities
take
steps
to
make
pedestrian
safety
a
priority.
U
Mayor
stokes,
thank
you
and
councilmembers.
Thank
you
for
having
us.
This
is
an
exciting
time.
We
enjoy
the
opportunity
to
come
before
you
and
thank
you
again
for
the
proclamation
and
I
can
tell
all
that
my
name
is
Janine.
Thorne
I
am
a
PTA.
I
am
the
chairperson
for
this
event,
at
the
Arden
or
elementary
school
JJ
KS
is
our
president
and
our
elementary
school
principal
is
Chaz.
Miller
and
I
can
tell
you
why
I
think
it's
such
a
great
day,
but
it's
not
about
me.
U
M
M
A
V
A
Has
been
made
in
second,
all
those
in
favor,
say:
aye
aye,
aye
opposed
motion
carries
at
this
time.
We
will
take
written
and
oral
communications
from
the
community
normal
rules.
The
length
of
time
allocated
oral
communications
is
set
at
30
minutes.
There's
a
three-minute
limit
per
speaker,
regardless
of
whether
you're
speaking
on
your
own
behalf
of
representing
a
group.
A
A
maximum
of
three
persons
are
permitted
to
speak
to
each
side
of
any
one
topic,
and
speakers
are
asked
to
begin
their
comments
by
identifying
themselves
and
their
address
on
the
record
and
remember
the
green
light
comes
on
yellow
light.
When
you
have
a
minute
left,
the
red
light
comes
on.
That's
it
next
person
up
Thank,
You
city
clerk.
Will
you
please
call
the
neighbor
first
speaker?
Yes,.
P
W
A
V
V
Yeah
absent
from
the
crowd
this
evening
is
one
of
our
most
dedicated
formidable
and
outspoken
Eastgate
residents,
Michelle
Wanamaker.
We
were
hopeful.
Her
return
will
be
sooner
than
later,
but
due
to
significant
injury,
she
sustained
from
a
fall
in
her
home.
She
has
been
out
of
commission
since
July
Michelle
was
only
just
released
from
the
convalescence
Center
after
surgery
on
her
ankle
and
kept
her
mobile.
She
will
begin
rehabilitation
and
physical
therapy
shortly
to
once
again
gain
her
mobility
and
hopefully
a
full
recovery.
V
Q
Good
evening
my
name
is
Don
Marsh
I'm,
the
president
of
sense,
the
Coalition
of
East
Side
neighborhoods
for
sensible
energy
early
this
morning
sense
submitted
a
request
to
the
Washington
utilities
and
Transportation
Commission.
We
are
asking
that
the
Commission
require
PSE
to
update,
misleading
or
out-of-date
assumptions
that
the
company
has
been
using
to
justify
the
construction
of
energized
Eastside.
You
should
have
received
a
copy
of
our
request
to
the
UTC,
but
for
the
benefit
of
our
audience,
I
will
summarize
the
five
questions
we
asked
one.
Q
What
justifies
psays
predicted
growth
of
peak
customer
demand
on
the
east
side,
two
in
which
locations
and
customer
sectors
is
high.
Demand
growth
expected
three.
How
much
electricity
is
the
state
of
Washington
obligated
to
send
to
Canada
for
what
federal
reliability
standards
apply
to
this
project?
Five?
Q
Can
modern
technologies
like
batteries,
help
produce
peak
demand
through
careful
research
and
consultation
with
experts
since
has
obtained
preliminary
preliminary
answers
for
each
of
these
five
questions,
and
we
now
have
five
compelling
reasons
that
indicate
energized.
Eastside
is
not
a
prudent
expenditure
for
psays.
Ratepayers
solutions
like
batteries
and
demand
response
will
increase
electrical
reliability
and
keep
our
electric
bills
low.
We
can
preserve
our
trees
and
lower
greenhouse
gas
emissions
and
we
don't
have
to
risk
increase.
We
don't
have
to
increase
risk
of
pipeline
explosions
next
to
our
homes
and
schools.
Q
We
are
not
asking
for
any
action
from
the
Bellevue
City
Council
at
this
time.
Well,
we
just
wanted
to
keep
you
in
the
loop
regarding
the
latest
developments
in
this
ongoing
debate.
We
want
you
and
the
citizens
of
the
Eastside
to
rest
assured
that
there
are
better
solutions
than
what
PSC
is
offering
and
we
will
continue
our
work
to
see
them
implemented
for
the
benefit
of
residents,
businesses
and
the
environment.
Thank
you
very
much.
Thank.
X
Hamlet,
Johnson,
3741,
122nd,
Avenue,
North,
Cats,
northeast,
okay,
first
of
all,
I
want
to
say
this
speaks
a
lot
to
me
not
to
you
that
I
spend
a
lot
of
time
with
the
young
children,
but
once
upon
a
time
there
were
three
little
pigs
and
they
told
them
to
make
some
beautiful
house
is
that
sustainable
States
has
sustainability
and
one
made
it
out
of
hay.
One
made
it
out
of
wood,
one
made
it
out
of
bricks
and
they
were
all
beautiful,
but
then
they
said
wait
a
second.
X
Those
are
all
good
buildings
and
they're,
beautiful
and
sustainable,
but
we
need
strong
buildings.
So
the
first
guy
said
Oh
strong
I
can
make
my
pay
pressboard
all
that
one
path
and
new
stuff
and
wait
a
second
make
sure
we're
doing
it
for
a
big
wind,
oh
wind,
I,
can
make
sure
balls.
I
can
do
that.
Second
guy
says:
I
can
do
that
too,
with
my
wood,
we're
going
for
sure,
sustainability,
beautiful
and
strong
got
it.
X
The
guy
with
the
bricks
say
well,
I
was
going
for
strong,
but
my
strong
doesn't
really
work
with
a
lot
of
sheer
walls
and
all
that.
But
I
can
do
it
if
I
can
find
some
of
these
things
that
are
all
above,
and
so
they
did
it,
and
so
what
they
needed
to
have
was
to
think
of
what
was
the
thing
they
were
trying
to
do
to
begin
with.
Maybe
they
got
confused
in
the
weeds
about
being
brick
being
being
script,
stop
I,
can't,
say,
sir
offers
in
recent
today
being
wood.
X
Instead,
what
they
wanted
was
you
know,
strong,
went
right
to
things.
What
I
think
that's
counseling,
you
should
go
back
and
rethink.
What
we
want
is
air
and
light,
and
you
can't
turn
one
dial
and
make
air
light
happen.
It's
the
whole
constructs
so
I
think
that
we're
talking
a
lot
tonight
about
one
dial
and
there's
multiple
styles
on
that
and
what
are
the
big
ones
that
we
need
to
change
and
don't
just
go
back
and
say:
okay,
one,
a
B
or
C.
X
K
Y
157
88
North
East
4th
Street
Bellevue
I,
wanted
to
speak
tonight
about
issues
of
trust
and
I.
I
know
I'm,
not
speaking
so
much
to
council
tonight.
I
know:
we've
kind
of
hashed
over
that
council,
one
staff,
but
I
I
feel
like
as
I
sat
here
and
listened
to
a
lot
of
testimony.
There's
the
thing.
That's
bothered
me
for
some
time
and
I
thought
I'd
like
to
take
some
time
to
address
it,
and
this
is
issues
of
trust
around
the
people
proposing
and
on
both
sides
of
the
men's
shelter
issue.
Y
At
the
very
first
meeting,
which
was
over
a
year
ago,
there
were
congregations
for
homeless
representatives.
That
said
that
there
had
been
no
problems
in
the
neighborhoods
around
these
sites
and
I
made
a
point
of
talking
to
over
the
representative
afterwards
and
letting
him
know
that
I
was
actually
aware
of
a
number
of
problems
and
then
I
felt
it
was
not
perchik
helpful
to
describe
it
in
an
inaccurate
way
and
that
it
did
not
lead
to
a
good
discussion.
Y
So
I
suggested
that
they
be
more
accurate
and
upfront
at
the
second
meeting.
There
was
some
of
that
and
there
was
a
neighborhood
representative
there
who
talked
about
some
of
the
problems
that
had
happened
at
one
of
the
sites
and
I
was
glad
to
see
that,
unfortunately,
since
then,
it
has
swung
back
the
other
way
and
up
until
the
last
time,
I've
heard
speak
people
speak
on
this
I've
heard,
advocates
and
volunteers
etc.
Y
Getting
up
repeatedly
speaking
in
support
and
making
untrue
statements,
numerous
of
them,
claiming
that
there
have
not
been
any
incidents
that
there
have
not
been
any
problems,
and
this
is
simply
not
true,
and
it's
not
a
path
towards
respectful
collaboration.
In
my
opinion,
the
citizens
of
Bellevue
are
intelligent
and
many
of
them
do
their
homework.
Y
When
you
continue
to
ignore
the
realities
of
the
situation,
you
are
damaging
the
possibility
of
developing
the
trust
that
is
needed
to
move
forward
towards
solutions
that
work
for
all
I,
don't
know
exactly
why
these
statements
continue
to
be
made,
but
none
of
the
possible
reasons
I
can
posit
are
very
good.
I
would
urge
those
who
testify
in
support
of
this
proposal,
to
do
their
homework
to
be
informed
and
to
only
make
claims
that
are
factually
supported,
I
think
that
would
be
very
helpful
in
moving
this
conversation
forward.
Thank
you.
Thank.
K
P
A
A
A
The
next
item
is
seven
council
business
and
new
initiatives.
Our
councilman
Wallace
has
raised
an
item
he
wishes
to
bring
forward
tonight,
and
so
we
will
and
he
has
provided
information
and
a
PowerPoint
and
all
that
he's
provided
himself
in
the
you
know.
The
staff
is
helped
facilitate
this,
but
this
is
a
presentation
from
councilmember,
Robertson,
councilmember,
wallets
and
Robinson.
S
A
S
And
also
on
the
staff
assistants,
they
made
clear:
the
staff
has
been
agnostic.
I
guess
would
be
a
fair
way
to
describe
this.
They
helped
me
load
it
on
a
video
screen,
but
it
is
something
that
I've
come
up
with
and
the
idea
is
to
try
to
provide
you
know
not
we're
not
making
decisions
tonight.
We're
just
to
provide
a
discussion
about
the
the
maintenance
facility
site.
S
First
of
all,
I
want
to
do
is
provide
a
little
context
from
people
who
haven't
been
with
us
every
Monday
night
kind
of
where
we
started
so
we
started
back
in
April.
The
staff
had
looked
at
five
sites
for
the
shelter
and
it
narrowed
it
down
to
one
there's.
Only
one
they
felt
was
a
viable
site,
and
that
was
the
Eastgate
location
and
in
April
that
council
added
the
two
additional
sites,
the
Lincoln
Center
property
and
the
maintenance
facility
site
so
sandy,
so
the
Lincoln
Center,
the
Lincoln
Center
property
is
right
across
the
street.
S
From
here
you
can
see
City
Hall
on
the
far
I
have
a
little
pointer,
I
mean
as
well
use
it
right
there
City
Hall.
This
is
where
the
the
day
the
window
shelter
is
located
right
now
and
the
building
is
at
the
end
of
its
useful
life.
It's
not
code
compliant.
We
can't
have
the
shelter
here
year
round,
but
the
idea
is
to
to
keep
this
as
the
band-aid
location
until
a
permanent
facility
is
is
available.
S
S
S
Think
one
of
the
negatives
of
this
deal
is
that
there's
four
parties
involved,
Bellevue,
King,
County,
cfh
and
imagine,
and
that
just
makes
things
incredibly
complicated,
which
may
be
why,
even
though
this
first
came
out
to
light
in
August
of
last
year,
there
hasn't
really
been
a
lot
of
movement
forward
movement
on
the
project.
So
what
we
have
today
is
kind
of
these
concept
designs
and
pretty
much
what
we
had
last
August
for
the
shelter.
S
The
basic
features
of
the
shelter
is
a
hundred
bed
overnight
facility,
which
is
comparable
to
what
the
Winter
Shelter
is
today
a
day
center
of
125
seats,
which
is
comparable
to
what
the
day
center
was
before
it
got
closed
down
and
then
50
to
60
units
of
affordable
housing
with
some
complimentary
services
like
medical
and
counseling
and
so
forth
in
the
building,
and
then
go
ahead
to
the
next
one
sandy.
So
this
is
the
slide
kind
of
showing
for
context
where
the
the
maintenance
facility
location
is
up
here
on
one
hundred
and
twentieth.
S
This
is
where
Sound
Transit
plans
to
put
the
maintenance
facility,
and
then
there
was
a
plan
to
put
the
transit
oriented
development
site
to
the
south
of
it.
And
then
this
is
our
rail
spur
parcel
down
here.
That
I'll
show
you,
which
is
where
the
proposal
is
to
put
the
shelter
on
our
property
and
I,
also
just
added
for
context
the
downtown
and
where
the
hospitals
are
and
so
forth.
Okay,
go
to
the
next
one.
S
So
this
is
the
current
status
of
the
ownership
of
the
land
for
the
maintenance
facility
property,
and
you
see
sound
transit
in
the
blue
as
either
condemned
or
is
in
the
process
of
condemning
all
of
that
land
for
the
Tamina's
facility
and
the
Tod
area.
But
this
piece
right
here
is
our
property.
It's
about
47,000
square
feet
and
you
see
it
juts
right
into
Sound
Transit's
property.
S
So,
regardless
of
the
shelter
discussion,
something
has
to
happen
and
we
have
made
no
commitments
yet
to
transfer
that
property
to
Sound
Transit,
and
so,
if
something
has
to
happen
between
Bellevue
and
Sound
Transit
to
get
that
pain
handle
out
of
the
way
of
their
property
to
make
the
Tod
area
work.
The
other
thing
I
put
on
the
slide
was
the
two
stars.
The
one
at
the
top
is
where
the
shelter
was
last
year.
S
Instead,
the
International
fibrous
building
before
Sound
Transit
condemned
it,
and
then
the
starboard
down
below,
of
course,
is
where
I'm
proposing
we,
we
move
the
shelter,
and
you
see
there
are
only
a
few
hundred
feet
apart.
So
when
kind
of
looking
at
the
you
know,
the
community
impacts
of
the
whole
thing.
In
my
view,
it
already
was
here.
We
didn't
hear
a
lot
of
complaints
about
it
when
it
was
there
and
so
I,
don't
know
why
we
would
expect
to
have
a
lot
for
the
new
location
in
this
place.
Next
slide.
S
Okay,
so
this
is
Sound
Transit's
concept,
design.
The
slide
on
the
left
is
a
little
higher
quality
rendering
of
it.
But
if
this
the
one
on
the
right
is
the
same,
it's
just
the
the
plan
view
this
sound
trains
have
presented
to
the
council
in
June
this
year
after
we
had
in
April
added
the
two
sites,
including
the
maintenance
facility
site
to
our
homeless,
shelter
discussion.
This
was
developed
under
a
confidential
arrangement.
S
Bellevue
had
a
staff
member
involved
in
the
discussions,
but
it
was
never
presented
at
the
council
or
the
public
until
June,
and
so
we
have
not
had
a
chance
to
comment
on
this
other
than
when
we
first
had
it
revealed
to
us
in
June,
and
you
know
so
again,
regardless
of
the
shelter.
Now
is
a
perfectly
appropriate
time
for
us
to
be
commenting
on
and
talking
about,
whether
this
concept,
design
works
and
and
also
about
making
changes
to
the
concept
design.
So
over
here,
what
you
see
is
again.
S
This
is
Bellevue's
property
and
you
see
how
it
goes
through:
building
five
of
Sound
Transit's
design
and
building
two
of
Sound
Transit's
design
and
really
just
kind
of
severs.
The
whole
thing
so
in
in
taking
a
look
at
this
when
I
was
working
with
an
architectural
firm
out
of
Kirkland
called
link
design,
who
really
done
a
great
job
in
in
working
need
to
come
up.
S
With
this
proposal
we
had
the
following
goals:
one
was
to
adjust
our
parcel
boundary
so
that
it
was
of
a
size
that
worked
for
the
shelter
but
also
got
out
of
Sound
Transit's
way
and
enabled
the
Tod.
The
new
parcel
should
be
about
the
same
size
and
we
ended
up
getting
it
to
be
exactly
the
same
size.
And
then
you
see
buildings,
four
and
five
here,
obviously
they're
going
to
need
to
be
changed
in
order
to
make
room
for
the
shelter's.
S
After
after
we're
done
with
the
design,
then
we
had
this
mitigation
concept
of
having
1.2
million
square
feet
of
development
potential
in
the
Tod
area
and
so
maintaining
that
development
potential
was
a
facet
of
it
and
then
incorporate
all
the
elements
of
the
Eastgate
shelter.
So
we
basically
use
that
design
as
a
cue
for
the
design
of
the
new
facility
go
ahead
to
the
next
slide,
and
so
this
is
the
the
plan
of
the
site
plan
of
what
we
came
up
with,
and
you
see
this
coloured
parcel
here.
S
This
would
be
the
new
boundary,
the
new
parcel,
with
the
boundary
line
adjustment.
This
again
shows
the
old,
the
current
city
parcel
and
what
it
does
you
see.
It
allows
for
the
footprint
of
the
lot
to
work
for
the
shelter
building
and
then
up
here.
Buildings,
four
and
five
have
been
changed
to
a
size
of
building
that
works
for
for
multi-family
residential.
But
then
what
doesn't
change
is
the
road
in
between
the
buildings
and
buildings,
one
two
three
or
six.
S
All
that
is
exactly
the
same,
so
it's
as
little
impact
to
sound
trains,
its
concept
design
as
possible,
but
at
the
same
time
allows
us
to
achieve
the
goal
of
having
a
site
that
that
works
for
us
and
would
allow
for
a
shelter
to
be
built
on
it
by
congregations
for
the
homeless
go
ahead.
So
this
shows
the
two
massing
massing
plans.
This
is
Sound
Transit's
version,
and
this
is
our
version.
S
So
the
only
thing
that
gets
eliminated
here
is
there's
a
little
retail
kiosk
at
they
showed
on
the
corner
here
and
otherwise
we've
got
the
buildings
again
viable
and
these
remain
again
the
same
go
ahead
to
the
next
one.
So
this
is
the
floor.
Plans
of
the
shelter
this
is
a
parking
floor
would
be
on
the
ground
down.
Here
is
the
the
first
floor,
a
ground
level
of
one
hundred
and
twentieth
Street.
The
entrance
would
be
on
the
southeast
corner
of
the
building.
S
This
is
the
first
floor
of
the
shelter
and
would
have
day
services
so
the
day
room
and
associated
counseling
and
other
services
that
go
along
with
it.
Then
one
floor
up
would
be
the
night
room,
so
you
have
the
bunk
room
with
a
hundred
bed
facility
and
still
more
service
capacity.
This
is
about
twice
as
large
as
the
East
Gate,
shelter
square
footage-wise,
so
lots
of
good
opportunities
for
programming
the
shelter
and
then
up
above
what
we
have
is
three
floors.
This
is
basically
this
represents
floor.
S
So
a
lot
more
to
come
on
the
potential
plan
for
the
shelter
at
the
site.
You
can
see
the
size
of
it
allows
for
that.
All
the
elements
that
we
were
looking
at
at
the
Eastgate
site
go
ahead.
This
slide
just
quickly
shows
how
the
development
capacity
remains
about
the
same,
that
1.2
million
square
feet
achieved
and
then
go
ahead
to
the
next
one,
and
then
this
is
a
little
video
that
will
kind
of
spin
in
the
building
around
show
it
from
all
angles.
S
Taking
issue
with
the
idea
of
continues
you
with
this
idea-
and
the
first
thing
we
said
was
that
there
was
an
agreement,
the
agreement
screen
sound
transit
in
Bellevue
on
this
date,
back
to
2015
and
there's
an
MoU
between
Bellevue
and
Sound
Transit,
and
there's
that
something
called
an
implementation
agreement,
and
the
first
thing
they
said
was
the
MOU
calls
for
1.2
million
square
feet
of
transitorium
development.
Well,
with
this
plan,
we
still
have
that.
Then
they
said
Sound
Transit
has
no
interest
in
revisiting
its
plan
designs.
S
S
They
said
the
implementation
agreement
and
the
MOU
must
be
honored.
Well,
there's
nothing
about
this
proposal
that
is
inconsistent
with
either
of
those
agreements.
Then
they
said
the
late-breaking
introduction
of
a
shelter
into
the
Ola
peace
development
will
undermine
the
chances
of
realizing
envision
Tod.
Well,
the
nice
thing
about
this
is
it's
not
part
of
the
Tod,
it's
separate
from
the
Tod
and
an
important
element
to
that
is.
If
we
achieve
the
boundary
line
adjustment,
we
can
just
basically
put
a
fence
on
the
northern
boundary
of
the
adjusted
parcel.
S
They
can
use
the
remainder
of
it
for
construction
staging
and
we
have
clear
paths
to
do
a
ground.
These
two
congregations
for
the
homeless
and
get
the
permitting
and
construction
done
on
our
timeline.
So
neither
parties
interfering
with
the
other
and
then
the
last
thing
they
said
was
that
they
can't
recommend.
We
endanger
the
Tod
vision
by
issuing
an
RFP
for
developers
that
includes,
or
seeks
to
incentivize
a
shelter
and
again,
that's
not
the
proposal.
S
The
proposal
is
to
have
a
separate
boundary
line
adjustment
and
what
sound
transit
and
once
the
boundary
line
adjustment
is
complete,
Sound
Transit's
out
of
the
picture,
they
do
their
thing
and
we
work
with
congregations
for
the
homeless
to
put
the
shelter
in
this
location.
So
that's
the
information
for
now.
This
has
really
just
intended
to
enter
this
into
the
conversation
and
try
to
better
describe
the
the
idea
behind
putting
the
shelter
in
the
bell
red
area
on
our
property,
and
hopefully
we
can
continue
to
figure
out
how
to
advance
the
conversation
going
forward.
A
F
It's
great
to
have
someone
who
can
envision
this
kind
of
stuff.
I
had
actually
forgotten
about
the
rail
spur
and
I
find
it
slightly
appalling
that
Sound
Transit
doesn't
think
we
have
the
right
to
negotiate
for
how
our
own
property
is
used.
So
I
would
like
to
know
from
staff
what
the
process
or
schedule
is
for
the
sound
transit
plan
and
dealing
with
the
issue
of
the
fact
that
they
are
planning
three
buildings
which
encroach
upon
either
wholly
or
partially
onto
a
city
of
Bellevue,
owned
piece
of
property.
Z
My
microplane
not
participating
in
scoring
and
evaluating
that
which
led
to
the
successful
presumed,
successful
bidder
with
Sound
Transit
the
next
steps
would
be
to
continue
to
look
at.
This
is
a
concept
design
for
the
Tod,
so
the
next
steps
were
to
continue
to
work
with
Sound
Transit
and
the
City
Council
and
Sound
Transit
board
to
take
that
into
something
that
would
allow
the
city
and
Sound
Transit
to
be
thinking
about
an
RFP
process
for
an
actual
Tod
kind
of
development
sometime
in
the
first
half
of
next
year.
Z
We
would
certainly
then
engage
with
the
city
of
Bell
with
the
city
council
about
how
does
our
spur
parcel
play
into
that
play
into
accomplishing
the
overall
objectives
that
the
council
laid
out
back
at
the
time
of
the
MOU
and
the
implementation
agreement
to
maximize
Tod
to
achieve
the
1.2
million
if
they
are,
that
was
envisioned
all
consistent
with
the
Bell
read
vision
for
this
area.
Okay,.
Z
So
a
couple
of
different
things
going
on
in
the
MOU
and
the
implementation
agreement,
we
called
for
Sound
Transit
for
their
om
Fe
project
to
do
what's
a
master
development
plan
for
actually
the
entire
properties
that
you
see
there
they
have
submitted
for
that.
It
came
in
with
spur
property
as
a
part
of
that
MDP,
and
we
submitted
a
letter
as
the
property
owner
to
the
permitting
agency.
Saying
it's.
Okay,
we
understand
it's
part
of
this
MDP
process
as
the
property
owner.
We
are
okay
with
that.
Z
The
purpose
of
that
single
MDP
is
really
to
it
gets
into
the
details
of
the
OMF
ii
project
itself.
So
it's
got
all
of
the
buildings
for
the
OMF
II,
the
maintenance
of
way
building
the
track
where's.
All
of
that
in
respect
to
the
Tod
property,
the
city
was
really
pushing
for
a
single
MDP
to
provide
some
more
certainty
again
to
the
market
about
how
the
Tod
property
would
relate
to
the
OMF
II.
Z
So
if
you
remember,
from
the
MOU
timeframe,
the
city
bargained
for
certain
utilities
to
be
connected
across
from
the
MFE
to
serve
the
Tod
property,
to
make
that
a
little
bit
more
developable
when
Sound
Transit
is
done
with
their
project.
Talk
about
how
circulation
and
access
would
work
into
that
Tod
property.
So
it's
those
kinds
of
things
where
how
is
the
trail
access
that
the
city
bargained
for
going
to
be
accommodated
in
the
future
Tod?
So
some
of
those
bigger
chunks
of
how
the
two
projects
would
work
together
are
covered
in
this
MDP.
Z
This
MDP
is
the
entitlement
for
their
om
fe
project
and
then
kind
of
sets
the
stage
for
the
future
Tod,
so
you're,
absolutely
correct.
There's
nothing
about
that!
That
requires
the
City
of
Bellevue
to
ultimately
sell
the
property
or
to
contribute
it
to
the
future
Tod.
It
again
provides
some
certainty
for
all
of
us
about
how
might
development
proceed
in
the
future
and.
F
If
and
what
ultimately
happens
with
that
property
is
a
City
Council
decision
right,
because
the
council
retains
authority
over
real
estate
for
the
city,
correct
I
just
wanted
to
get
that
out.
There
I
would
very
much
like
to
see
just
from
my
perspective
when
we
are
starting
to
have
that
discussion,
if
not
sooner,
for
us
to
make
sure
that
we
weave
this,
in
which
we
have
those
discussions
with
Sound
Transit,
because
it
is
our
property
and
no
matter
what
designs
they
have.
So.
Thank
you.
So.
B
I
actually
have
a
small
presentation
as
well:
I
want
to
assure
people
that
those
discussions
with
Sound
Transit
have
been
ongoing
and
very
serious,
but
what
I
want
to
do
with
this?
Just
do
a
little
bit
of
level
setting.
There
was
a
great
question
that
was
asked
by
mr.
Sanchez.
What's
next,
so
I
want
to
try
to
answer
a
little
of
that
in
this
and
then
because
I
was
the
representative
for
the
city
to
the
stakeholders
group
or
the
elected
representative.
I
want
to
talk
about
how
we
got
to
this
Tod
development
process.
B
I
think
that
there
are
some
issues
with
what
councilmember
Wallace
has
put
forward.
I
have
some
differences
of
opinion
on
some
of
his
on
some
of
the
statements
about
about
some
things.
I,
don't
want
to
have
a
fight.
What
I
want
to
do
is
try
to
clarify
a
little
bit
of
that.
So
if
you
have
an
opportunity
and
I,
this
also
was
I
was
one
of
the
persons.
B
There
were
several
council
members,
but
I
happen
to
be
one
of
those
who
has
pushed
very
strongly
for
us
to
have
the
homeless
shelter
to
have
a
permanent
site
for
the
congregation's
for
the
homeless
shelter.
So,
given
that
I
put
this
together
today,
I
did
not
have
help
from
staff.
I
have
cobbled
together
some
information
that
comes
from
Sound
Transit.
It
is
documentation,
that's
public,
so
again
the
progress
to
date,
and
what
is
next,
please
go
to
the
next
slide.
B
B
What
happened
is
a
proposal
came
forward
to
use
the
East
Gate
Public
Health
site?
That
proposal
came
from
King
County.
Imagine,
housing
and
congregations
for
the
homeless
any
place
that
we
build.
A
shelter
in
this
city
will
will
include
almost
all
of
those
partners
in
it,
because
King
County
is
the
major
funder,
so
they
will
be
a
part
of
it.
If
it
doesn't
have
housing,
then
you
wouldn't
necessarily
have
a
housing
component
to
it.
I
hope
that
we
can
have
a
shelter
that
has
that
housing
component
to
it.
B
A
Because
we
were
curious
to
councilman
Wallace
be
the
same,
courteous
to
deputy
mayor.
The
speaker
earlier
talked
about
you
know,
being
honest
and
upfront
and
talking
about
things
and
it's
not
just
a
one-way
street.
Just
saying
no
and
shouting
down
doesn't
help.
Anybody
doesn't
help
me
move
anybody's
thoughts,
so
so.
B
I-
and
you
know,
people
are
entitled
to
their
thought.
We
have
had,
in
my
mind
an
extensive
public
process.
We
have
had
a
number
of
public
meetings
we
have
had
and
I
would
agree
with
miss
Morris
I
think
some
people
have
overstated
things.
Some
people
have
have
understated
the
risk,
and
some
people
have
very
much
overstated
the
risk
and
the
issues
and
I
know
the
issues
that
were
caused
in
her
neighborhood
by
tent
city
full
by
tent
city
and
I.
B
Understand
that
perfectly
in
September
of
2017.
Just
a
little
bit
ago,
we
unanimously
adopted
the
Eastgate
zoning
that
zoning
allows
for
a
shelter
day
center
and
supportive
housing.
That
decision
was
unanimous
on
the
part
of
the
council,
and
that
is
what
the
council
needed
to
do
to
satisfy
the
provision
in
the
letter
of
agreement.
I
agree:
I,
disagree
with
councilmember
Wallace
that
the
process
for
the
Eastgate
site
was
stalled
by
the
parties.
I
believe
it
was
stalled
by
going
through
that
process,
but
I'm
fine
with
it
having
gone
through
that
process.
B
So
we've
now
met
the
letter
of
agreement
and
it's
up
to
congregations
for
the
homeless.
Imagine
housing
and
King
County
to
put
together
I
think
what's
required
under
that,
as
a
funding
agreement
what's
required
under,
that
is
a
property
agreement
for
the
disposition
of
the
property.
I
would
encourage
them
if
they
are
going
to
go
ahead
with
this
site
to
work
on
an
operational
plan
and
then
to
bring
that
forward
and
again
continue
to
have
a
public
dialogue.
But
that
is
in
my
mind,
where
we
are
for
the
next
step
in
that
process.
B
If
we
go
to
the
to
the
next
slide,
this
is
what
we've
looked
at
as
solutions
for
homelessness
and
I'll
be
very
quick
with
this.
This
is
in
our
comprehensive
plan
and
the
regional
all
home
plan.
We
want
homelessness
to
be
rare,
brief
and
one
time
we
need
to
have
a
emergency
shelter
to
be
able
to
accomplish
that.
You
also
need
to
have
housing
after
shelter
and
I.
B
Think
that's
been
stated
and,
and
frankly,
I
agree
with
councilmember
Wallace
totally
on
that,
and
the
city
has
developed
an
affordable
housing
plan
and
we've
been
increasing
funding
and
that
again
has
been
a
unanimous
decision.
I
also
think
the
data
shows
very
clearly
that
from
this
last
year,
the
concept
that
cfh
has
had
of
putting
the
day
shelter,
the
daysailer
Center
in
with
the
shelter,
has
been
a
success.
They
have
had
the
opportunity
to
move
people
out
of
emergency
housing
and
along
the
spectrum
of
getting
back
into
housing.
B
So
let
me
go
to
the
next
slide.
This
is
the
om
Fe,
Tod
development
and
I
just
put
up
a
couple
of
headlines
from
2014
and
2015.
It
seems
like
it
was
only
yesterday.
We
were
very
angry
with
what
Sound
Transit
did
to
us
all.
Seven
council
members
of
the
time-
and
you
can
even
see
here,
though
the
lead
to
the
article
Bellevue
officials,
had
been
accusing
sound
transit
of
betrayal
and
bad
faith.
Last
summer,
I've
got
to
say:
I
was
an
accurate
statement.
B
They
at
news
actually
was
councilmember
Robertson
and
I,
who
went
to
The,
Sound,
Transit,
board,
meeting
and
prosecuted
our
case
to
replace
the
1.2
million
square
feet
and
to
have
a
real
process
to
do
that.
Not
to
have
sound
transit
just
go,
oh
we'll,
try
something
and
Sound
Transit
has
truthfully
kept
its
word
and
they've
kept
that
working
with
staff
and
with
elected
leaders
and
with
stakeholders.
B
There
was
a
very
small
part
of
this
that
was
had
a
one
staff
member
on
our
staff
working
on
it
there's
a
very
small
part,
and
it
was
in
the
zero
to
30%
design
concept
of
this.
That
was
where
that
was
so
next
slide.
Please,
so
they
brought
in
HR
and
a
advisors.
This
is
an
economic
development
and
real
estate
firm.
It
has
a
very
strong
national
reputation
to
put
together
this
plan.
They
looked
at
lots
of
different
plans
of
how
the
OMF
II
could
fit
in.
B
We
looked
at
plans
that
had
different
platforms
built
within
the
OMF
fee
structure.
Over
tracked-
and
this
is
the
we
being
the
stakeholder
committee-
we
had
a
number
of
different
things
and
they
finally
figured
out
a
great
way
and
it's
been
brought
to
us
of
moving
the
OMF
e
up
and
having
the
the
Tod
development
as
near
to
the
station,
as
is
possible
next
slide
very
quickly.
Just
to
show
these
are
some
of
the
projects
they
work
on
Anacostia,
the
High,
Line
I
think
that's
New
York
on
they
work
on
big
projects.
B
They
know
what
they're
doing
next
line.
So
this
was
what
they
came
up
with
exemplary
gold
value
through
placemaking,
embracing
the
vision
and
principles
and
maximizing
the
utilization
of
residual
land.
Our
land
is
residual
land.
The
market
that
is
there
is
a
60,000
square
foot
market.
It's
not
a
kiosk,
it's
basically
a
major
or
that's
where
much
of
the
roar
it
maybe
a
little
bit
smaller
than
that,
but
that's
where
a
significant
amount
of
retail
would
go.
That
is
the
site
that
councilmember
Wallace
has
has
said.
B
B
This
has
been
very
well
thought
out
to
get
this
in
60,000
square
feet
of
retail
office
at
650
or
550
units
of
housing
roughly,
and
we
are
looking
at
the
ways
to
do
that
so
that
they
are
market
rate,
they
are
affordable
housing
and
they
have
efficiency.
You
units
in
them
the
1.1
to
1.2
million
square
feet.
There's
parking
density
is
3600
people
and
the
FA
are
there.
Is
that
3.4?
B
There
are
connections
that
need
to
be
made.
A
key
connection
is
the
connection.
Through
this
development
to
the
east
side,
rail
corridor,
I
was
looking
at
what
councilmember
Wallace
put
out.
There
may
be
a
way
to
do
that,
but
in
this
case
the
way
to
do
that
would
be
going
directly.
If
I
looked
at
his
plan,
it
would
be
the
the
trail
would
go
directly
along
where
the,
where
he's
planning
for
the
for
the
shelter
there's
also
connection
in
the
future
to
Ichigo
away.
So
this
has
been
a
very
well
thought
out.
B
S
B
But
still
putting
it
on
this
site
makes
it
an
integral
part
of
the
Tod
development
next
slide.
So
where
do
we
go
now?
We
have
been
working
cooperatively
with
Sound
Transit
to
get
this
to
market,
get
the
Tod
development
consistent
with
the
MOU,
the
the
stakeholder
committee
that's
been
meeting.
This
includes
REI
Children's
Hospital
University
of
Washington.
It
includes
myself
the
deputy
mayor.
It
includes
the
deputy
city
manager.
It
includes
the
deputy
King
County
Executive.
B
It
includes
members
who
represent
the
east
side
rail
corridor,
there's
a
significant
number
of
people
who
have
been
working
on
this,
so
this
has
not
been
done
in
any
form
of
vacuum.
Also,
the
nearby
landowners
have
been
working
on
this
I
think.
The
key
thing
here
is
determining
the
value
of
the
spur
property
and
then
the
question
is
what
public
purpose
do
we
use
that
value,
for
my
personal
opinion
is
affordable,
housing
and
park
is
the
best
place
to
take
the
value
of
that
land
and
put
it
the
leverage
for
the
development
of
affordable
housing.
B
It
could
be
the
affordable
housing
that
is
in
that
development.
It
could
be
something
like
a
Bellevue
housing,
trust
fund
or
some
form
of
revolving
loan
fund.
I
say:
allow
imagine
housing
congregations
for
the
homeless
and
King
County
to
go
forward
and
come
up
with
their
Eastgate
plan
or
say
they're
not
going
to
if
they're
not
going
to,
then
we're
back
into
another
process.
I
will
say
there
are
at
least
two
sites
that
I
would
prefer
to
what
mr.
B
Wallace
has
put
forward,
but
if
it
can't
be
done,
we'll
have
to
look
at
other
sites,
but
the
place
to
do
that
with
this
proposal
is
consistent
with
the
process
that
we
signed
off
on,
which
would
be
consistent
with
having
somebody
come
forward
to
offer
it
within
that
RFI
when
it's
out
in
the
hopefully,
the
second
quarter
of
20
18
or
the
third
quarter
of
2018.
So
I
I
will
I
believe
everything
that
I've
said
matches
policies
that
the
City
Council
has
adopted.
Most
of
those
policies
unanimously.
K
Amazing
presentation,
deputy
me
some
I
just
presented
it's
very
well
done.
It's
professionally,
almost
I
mean
complement
to
you.
We
made
up
this
thing.
It's
almost
like
it's,
not
transept
presentation,
well,
the
hot
information,
but
no,
no,
no
there's
no
company,
it's
complimentary
for
what
mr.
Sharma
has
done
on
its
own.
These
are
very
good
analysis
on
its
own
when
the
work
was
done
and
TOD
started
working
with
City
good
stuff.
You
know
very
thought
of
well
consider
presentations,
but
a
lot
of
stuff
I
think
it's
not
being
really
discussed
fully
understood
by
the
council.
K
A
lot
of
information
I,
don't
believe
we
have
thorough
discussion
conversation.
The
concept
is
for
sure,
definitely
I
agree.
Tod
sometimes
said,
but
these
are
very
much
detailed.
The
development
Sound
Transit
you
know
has
proposed
as
shown
I,
don't
recall.
I
must
be
playing
down
or
something
I
think,
because
we
don't
have
the
scheduler
session
and
theater
discussion
to
really
talk
about
them.
I,
don't
remember
any
specific
discussion
that
we
agreed
to
this
I
concept.
I
was
presented
on
the
what
I
you
just
presented.
K
If
we
had
that's
different,
we
make
decisions,
we've
proved
it
and
I,
don't
think
so.
It's
just
basically
a
concept.
It
may
may
even
be
one-sided
or
whatever,
but
if
it
isn't
I,
don't
think
it
lacks
up
in
us
what
you
presented
especially
now,
in
light
of
the
only
big
decisions,
it's
always
best
or
you
could
change
based
on
weighing
the
pros
and
cons
what
new
information,
what
new
opportunities
we
have
I
think
right
now
we're
talking
about
real
controversial
issue,
tough
issue
about
homeless
site.
K
That's
on
a
big
big,
big
big
picture,
a
really
new
twist
on
what
we're
talking
about
so
I.
Think
to
me
it's
such
a
big
issue.
Everything
is
open.
Unfortunately,
it
is
that's
all
we
here,
for
we
always
have
to
tackle
the
issues
based
on.
What's
come
up
to
us
three
years
ago,
five
years
ago,
whenever
there
was
done
in
opinion
vacuum
on
its
own
great
great
stuff,
but
I
think
now,
with
what
we're
looking
at
a
homeless,
shelter,
it's
a
brand-new
brand-new
ballgame,
so
I
so
I
think
mr.
K
Wallace
to
present
something
as
alternative
based
on
homeless
site
is
a
new
issue.
To
me,
you
know
we
have
to
decide
for
the
community,
which
is
now
more
important
to
look
at
there's
a
new
new
ballgame,
so
I'm
willing
to
look
at
this
homeless
site
in
light
of
the
do.
Tod
development
I
think
miss
Wallace
come
out
with
the
solution
and
I'm.
You
know
at
this
point.
K
Both
are
new
ideas
that
presented
to
me
and
I,
really
like
to
look
at
both
of
them
very
closely
and
spend
time
to
understand
both
together,
not
just
isolated
and
understand
the
community.
In
there
look
at
it.
The
community's
input
Kelly
give
us
because
affects
everybody.
You
know
affects
all
of
us,
so
I
think
we
need
to
look
at
this
whole
photo.
K
So
I
would
would
like
to
have
to
the
show
the
slides
for
me,
so
I
can
really
go
through
it
understand
it
better
and
then
I
believe
the
console
probably
will
be
interested
should
be
looking
at
this
whole
whole
thing
go
together
and
there
may
be
other
things
we
need
to
be.
Also
considering,
as
I
have
asked,
you
know,
homeless,
shelters,
it's
not
just
a
location.
Just
want
to
do
this
because
we
had.
We
have
a
proposal.
That's
come
up
to
us.
It's
really
a
big
big
question
that
affects
the
whole
city.
K
K
K
Things
everywhere,
but
nothing
works
together.
Nobody
likes
it,
that's
not
the
way
it
works.
So
I
want
to
thank
mr.
Wallace
spending
a
lot
of
time.
Looking
at
addressing
one
problem
and
I
really
appreciate,
you
know,
deputy
mayor
come
up
with
this
history
and
DOD
it's
an
important
situation,
especially
on
song,
but
let's
look
at
it
wholly
holistically
and,
let's
figure
out
all
can
do
about
it.
Okay,
thank
you.
A
S
So
I
just
had
a
little
bit
follow
up
to
the
earlier
comments.
Could
you
flip
down
the
slide
that
keep
going
keep
going
back?
Okay,
back
yeah
right,
that's
probably
good!
So,
first
of
all,
I
just
want
to
point
out
that
this
this
option
is
is
more
ideal
because
we
can
do.
We
can
do
the
residential
and
the
shelter
together.
There
is
an
option
that
compacts
it
to
a
three-story
building
single
use,
shelter
building
and
it
would
fit
on
our
site,
at
least
as
I,
understand
the
site.
S
Right
now
and
remember,
this
is
a
concept
right,
I
mean
we
haven't
done,
geotechnical
studies
and
all
the
other
things.
We
need
to
do
to
really
make
sure
exactly
how
it
all
lays
out,
but
there
is
a
there's
a
potential
just
to
do
it
on
our
site.
But
the
important
thing
is
we.
You
know
it's
really
in
the
both
sides,
best
interests
to
be
collaborative,
because
this
the
whole
thing
doesn't
work
unless
we
can
get
that
out
of
their
way.
S
So
that's
a
point
number
one:
could
you
go
down
to
the
slide
where
you
compare
the
areas
of
the
of
the
two
options?
Yeah,
so
mm-hmm?
The
market
is
1887
square
feet
that
Sound
Transit's
numbers.
So
there's
not
a
lot
of
retail.
It's
not
going
to
be
huge.
1887
Square
fee
is
about
the
size
of
a
Starbucks,
and
then
the
other
thing
I
want
to
point
out
is
just
that.
You
know
this
is
the
the
concept.
S
Design
concept,
design
for
the
transitory
and
development
is
not
something
that's
been
done
with
the
typical
public
process
that
something
that's
a
bellevue
property
would
go
through.
The
stakeholders
group
was
the
functional
equivalent
of
redesigning
downtown
Bellevue
Park,
with
a
group
made
up
of
Kemper
development,
his
tenants
and
his
consultants
and
a
couple
people
from
the
city.
It
then
went
into
a
process
with
Sound
Transit
on
their
site
for
their
Tod
site.
S
That
was
designed
in
calm
under
a
confidentiality
agreement
with
one
staff
member
from
the
city
of
Bellevue
and
to
my
knowledge
other
than
Nancy.
We
had
no
input
into
that
design,
and
so
now
it's
come
out
in
June
which,
like
here's,
your
concept,
design
on
your
property
and
in
them
in
the
middle
of
it
I
discover
well
hey.
You
know
we
have
a
need
for
a
homeless
shelter,
and
we
have
this
property
here
personally,
I'd
rather
put
it
to
that
use.
So
a
concept
design
is
a
concept
design
for
a
reason.
S
It's
at
a
point
where
it's
easy
to
make
changes
to
it,
and
so
this
now
is
that
time.
It
is
totally
inappropriate
for
sound
transit
to
put
in
a
letter
to
us
that
the
conversations
closed,
because
the
conversations
just
opening
for
everybody,
except
for
the
very
few
who
were
involved
with
the
stakeholders
group
or
the
confidential
design,
that
sound
transit
and
its
consultants
did
so.
B
B
B
S
Let
me
just
to
be
clear
this.
This
information
up
here
is
all
Sound,
Transit's,
architect
or
concern
over
this
Hensel
Phelps
outfit,
that's
their
information
and
it
shows
buildings
one
through
six,
the
retail
kiosk
which
I
plugged
in
here.
What
changes
in
our
concept
buildings,
one
two
three
are
the
same
buildings,
four
and
five
or
150,000
square
feet:
one's
a
little
bit
smaller
building
six
is
the
same,
and
then
we
swap
out
the
retail
kiosk
for
the
shelter
and
the
shelter
is
65,000
square
feet
so
actually
on
the
site.
S
B
AA
B
S
A
Mayor
yes,
a
question
on
this,
and
my
understanding
is
that
what
has
been
shown
is
a
very
preliminary.
The
the
the
basic
plan
that
councilor
Waze
is
talking
about
is
a
primary
design
and
the
that
overlaps,
our
property,
and
if
we
don't
agree
to
that,
they
do
something
else
right
and
this
isn't
set
in
stone
and
they
can't
come
in.
Obviously
they
understand
that
and
acknowledge
that
they
can't
come
in
and
build
something
over
our
property
unless
we
agree
to
it
so
to
base
everything
on
that.
A
This
is
a
fix
design
and
so
we're
going
to
move
things
around
is
not
reality
at
this
point.
In
that
correct
I
mean
they're,
not
what
the
what
has
been
presented
as
the
plan,
including
tick.
Putting
a
part
of
a
building
across
our
spur
is
not
a
final
plan.
It's
not
set
in
stone.
It
was
just
designed
at
a
certain
time.
That's
been
that
designs
been
around
for
some
time,
so.
Z
So
it
was
intended
to
show
you
could
get
there
with
the
way
that
the
successful
design
bidder
ended
up
reconfiguring
to
some
extent
some
of
the
o
MFE
and
shows
that
potential
and
shows
the
potential
to
include
some
of
the
other
things
that
the
city
bargained
for
and
the
MOU.
So
so
it's
a
concept.
For
that
reason,
based
on
the
council
direction
and
TOD
principles
that
we
had
the
MOU
and
the
implementation
agreement,
we've
had
in
many
conversations
about
a
shared
objective,
with
our
property
and
Sound
Transit's
property.
Z
To
achieve
something
like
that,
Tod
that
meets
the
bellroad
principle
that
it
accomplishes
1.2
million
square
feet.
So
we
certainly
haven't
committed
to
sell
that
property.
We
haven't
committed
to
allow
any
particular
development
over
it,
but
we
have
been
participating
for
several
years
in
the
assumption
that
that
kind
of
area
that
is
identified,
including
ours
and
there
would
go
forward
through
this
process,
go
to
market
and
end
up
with
a
development
that
approximates
the
1.2
million
square
feet.
Mixed-Use
Bell,
Road,
vision,
right.
G
Well,
I
sure
appreciate
everybody
support
for
a
homeless
shelter
in
Bellevue.
We
have
a
very
real
bins
homeless
problem
that
is
not
going
to
go
away
and
I.
Think
council,
members,
Chelm,
enak
and
Wallace
for
working
on
this
I
have
a
question
from
the
community
feedback
that
I
received
the
biggest
reason
that
people
don't
think
that
Eastgate
is
an
appropriate
site
for
the
proposed
ment,
shelter,
supportive
services
and
housing
is
the
proximity
to
neighborhoods.
So,
in
my
estimation,
it's
about
it's
about
500
feet
away
from
the
nearest
condominium
building
and
what
you
are
proposing.
G
S
G
S
What
families
are
we
going
to
be
building
you're
talking
about
in
the
concept
design
of
a
Tod
site
that
hasn't
yet
been
built?
Mm-Hmm?
So
basically,
what
we're?
Having
is
in
East
Gate?
We
have
a
situation
where
we're
planning
to
put
a
homeless
shelter
next
to
residential
properties
that
are
already
built
and
weren't
designed
with
it
in
mind
and
we're
comparing
it
to
putting
a
shelter
at
a
place.
S
That's
on
a
piece
of
vacant
land
within
hundreds
of
feet,
of
where
the
shelter
was
where
nobody
complained
about
it
and
where
there's
a
concept
proposal
that,
as
Kate
said,
may
or
may
not
be
the
proposal
at
the
end
of
the
day,
and
it's
certainly
where
we
can
design
going
forward
to
mitigate
the
impacts
of
the
shelter
and,
in
fact
embrace
the
shelter
and,
by
the
way,
the
shelter.
The
intent
of
the
shelter
is
to
build
it.
S
In
accordance
with
the
design
guidelines
from
the
Bell
Red
Code,
completely
consistent
with
what
the
zoning
ordinance
is
required
for
the
building,
so
that
it
will
be
complementary
to
the
quality
kind
of
buildings
that
are
in
that
neighborhood.
So
I
think
we
have
every
opportunity
here
to
make
this
something
that
not
only
can
the
city
as
a
whole
embrace
because
it's
in
the
right
location,
but
that
it
really
fits
within
the
overall
nature
and
feel
that
we're
trying
to
achieve
with
the
transit
oriented
development
of
that
area.
S
G
S
Is
an
opportunity
for
us
to
work
with
our
public
sector
agency
who's,
building
a
transitory
and
development
opportunity
right
next
door
and
locate
this
low
barrier,
low-income
shelter
with
affordable
housing
on
top
of
it?
Next
to
residential
that
it's
designing
and
putting
out
into
an
RFP
process.
Where
I
remind
you,
the
rule
that
the
state
said
in
place
is
that
affordable
housing
needs
to
be
used
on
80%
of
that
land.
S
So
I
think
this
is
a
great
opportunity
for
us
really
to
get
out
there
and
achieve
not
just
the
goals
for
the
shelter
but
to
achieve
a
new
vision
for
affordable
housing
and
combining
these
different
mixes
of
incomes
together
in
one
new
neighborhood,
where
it
can
be
designed
to
accommodate
these
things
in
advance,
as
opposed
to
putting
it
in
a
place
where
it
wasn't,
and
we
never
gave
any
forethought
to
how
it
might
fit
to
the
buildings
that
are
already
there.
So
I.
B
Just
you
know,
I
I
was
not
going
to
go
into
write
a
discussion
about
the
elements,
but
there
are
300
occupiable
units
that
are
very
close
to
this
property.
Already
there
are
500
more
that
are
being
built
that
are
near
to
this
property.
So
there
has
been
a
dramatic
change
in
this
neighborhood
and
we
all
know
that
this
neighborhood
is
going
to
undergo
dramatic
change
between
now
and
2020
3,
with
a
significant
amount
of
residential
development.
B
So
all
of
that
is
in
so
I'm
just
gonna
leave
it
at
that,
because
I
wasn't
going
to
go
into
it
tonight,
but
I
just
I
have
to
say.
If
you
want
to
go
into
the
specifics
of
the
items
that
the
Eastgate
residents
have
been,
writing
us
about
I'm
happy
to
go
into
those
and
how
both
of
these
sites
are
incredibly
similar.
Well,.
S
And
I
would
embrace
that
I
think
we
shouldn't
ignore
anything.
It
really.
You
know
this.
What
this
is
about
is
trying
to
get
us
back
to
a
point
where
we
should
have
started
when
we're
comparing
three
viable
sites,
instead
of
just
trying
put
it
at
one
site
and
so
I
think
you
know,
my
hope
is
that
this
is
what
tonight
has
accomplished,
and
now
we
can
go
forward
and
let's
have
an
honest
and
open
discussion
about
both
locations
and
which
one's
more
appropriate.
S
B
B
AA
J
Well,
kudos
to
mr.
Wallace
for
presenting
a
spectacular
plan
and,
quite
honestly
and
I
mean
this
sincerely
that
we
can
get
into
the
discussion
about.
Is
it
close
to
residential
now
later
in
in
the
past,
in
the
future,
this
gets
down
to
what
I've
been
saying
all
along
this
isn't
really
about
the
measurements
of
one
distance
or
another
distance
to
something
because
they're
gonna
vary
in
every
different
place.
J
We
look
at
what
we
really
should
be
focusing
at
I
think
is
from
the
opposite
side,
and
that
is
how
do
we
take
something
like
this
and
make
it
work
in
our
community
and
I?
Think
Kevin's
proposal
really
is
an
opportunity
for
us
to
really
get
past
the
let's
argue
about
whether
or
not
this
is
a
quarter
mile
or
three-eighths
of
a
mile
from
something
and
really
discuss
more.
J
J
You
know
I,
look
forward
to
having
a
good
discussion
about
this,
and
you
know
frankly,
one
of
my
suggestions
a
couple
of
months
ago
was
why
can't
we
have
two
facilities,
because
these
are
on
different
sides
of
the
city.
I,
don't
know
that
we
want
to
spend
the
money
for
two
facilities,
but
I
believe
homelessness
is
only
going
to
get
bigger
and
more
entrenched,
not
just
here
but
throughout
all
of
the
Eastside
and
throughout
the
Puget
Sound
area,
because
I
think
our
economy
is
going
to
continue
to
boom.
J
You're
gonna
have
more
people
that,
for
one
reason
or
another,
get
thrust
into
homelessness,
most
of
them
for
short
term
stuff.
Those
are
not
the
people
that
we
necessarily
worry
about,
but
they
still
need
the
services
and
they
still
need
our
assistance
and
then
there's
that
small
group,
which
is
really
what
we're
all
fearful
of,
isn't
it
it's
that
group
of
people
that
we
don't
necessarily
know
how
to
help
as
effectively
as
we
possibly
can
and
let's
face
it.
Some
of
them
are
not
in
no
position
to
accept
our
help.
J
Sometimes,
so
we
have
to
figure
out
how
we're
going
to
do
that.
We
need
these
facilities
badly
and
really
we
need
to
get
past
the
the
arguments
of
not
in
my
backyard
and
really
look
at
the
discussions
of
how
do
we
make
it
work
in
anyone's
backyard?
How
do
we
make
it
safe?
How
do
we
make
it
viable
and
how
do
we
do
it
in
a
way
that
is
in
pathetic
and
helpful
to
you?
F
You
so
thank
you
for
both
deputy
mayor
Jill,
Menaka
and
councillor
Wallace
for
providing
the
powerpoints
to
get
us
talking
about
this,
because
this
this
issue
has
been
as
far
as
the
sighting
has
been
a
little
bit
on
hold.
So
I
wanted
to
reflect
on
the
second
PowerPoint.
We
saw
because
I
disagree
with
some
of
the
conclusions
that
were
inferred.
F
We
did
unanimously
pass
the
letter
of
agreement,
but
that,
in
my
mind
and
I
know
in
several
of
my
colleagues,
mind
was
not
a
done
deal.
It
was
a
more
of
a
license
to
discuss
and
explore
and
to
do
our
due
diligence
and
to
work
with
King
County
last
I
heard
King
County
had
not
even
done
the
things
that
they
were
required
to
do
under
that
agreement.
F
I
haven't
had
an
update
in
in
a
number
of
months,
but
it
was
not
a
final
determination
through
going
through
the
due
diligence
and
I've
said
this,
and
we
had
a
did,
have
a
split
vote.
I
think
it
was
four
to
three
technically
but
more
like
three
and
a
half
to
three
and
a
half
about
moving
forward
with
Eastgate,
I
and
I
said
at
that
time
and
I'll
say
again
through
the
due
diligence.
My
opinion
is
that
the
Eastgate
site
is
fatally
flawed
because
of
the
forested
area
around
there.
F
I
think
it's
gonna
be
incredibly
hard
to
police.
I've
talked
to
a
number
of
police
officers
off
the
record
about
the
difficulty
of
trying
to
make
sure
that
place
is
safe,
so
I
don't
want
to
get
into
the
details
of
escape,
but
just
I'm
not
good
I.
Just
but
suffice
it
to
say
I.
Don't
personally
think
that's
a
done
deal
and
I.
Don't
think
that
it
was
ever
the
intention
of
some
of
the
council
members
that
that
was
a
done
deal
just
because
we
signed
a
letter
of
agreement.
F
That
said,
I'm
also
a
little
troubled
that
folks
are
more
concerned
about
a
future
development
and
the
quality
of
life
for
those
folks
than
the
people
who
live
and
have
paid
taxes.
Involve
you
all
this
time,
not
that
I'm
not
concerned
about
having
quality
of
life
everywhere.
I
but
I
do
think
that
just
like,
if
a
freeway
is
built
before
a
house,
a
housing
development,
the
housing
development
is
developed,
such
that
it's
they
have
quieting
things
put
on
there,
better
windows,
etc,
to
keep
out
the
dust
to
keep
out
the
noise.
F
If
something
is
that's
difficult,
the
site
is
their
first
or
at
the
same
time
something
is
located.
You
can
design
it
in
such
a
way
as
to
make
it
a
better
development
for
the
difficult
to
site
thing
as
well
as
for
the
surrounding
area.
So
that's
where
I'd
like
to
see
us
go.
I
would
like
to
see
staff
I
know
that
there's
some
digesting
to
go
on
to
come
back
to
the
council
with
a
rough
outline
of
process
for
updating
on
the
Eastgate
site
work.
F
Also,
the
letter
of
agreement
really
should
be
on
the
homeless,
shelter
site.
It's
on
our
page.
It's
not
I
was
looking
for
it
a
few
minutes
ago,
a
process
on
that,
as
well
as
the
process
on
the
Tod
site
at
the
OMF
II.
Yes,
we
did
know
the
staff
was
working
on
this
I,
don't
know
who
all
was
informed
as
far
as
the
black
box
that
that
work
was
under
going
under,
but
council
was
not
allowed
to
know.
There
was
a
confidentiality
agreement.
I
wanted,
updates.
I
know
that
my
colleagues
wanted
updates.
F
We
were
not
allowed
to
have
those
updates
on
the
OMF
II
Tod
Planning,
and
so
we
heard
about
it
in
June.
It
is
the
time
now
to
negotiate
think
it
is
very
ripe
right
now
to
negotiate
about
it
in
general.
Even
if
the
homeless,
shelter
wasn't
an
issue
which
I
think
it
is
and
I
would
definitely
like
to
see
a
little
bit
more
due
diligence
done
on
this
plan.
We
had
given
direction
to
study
this
site
anyway,
and
mr.
F
F
So
if
we
could
get
some
time
in
the
next
several
weeks,
a
schedule
and
a
process
for
flushing
out
the
Tod
at
the
om
Fe
plan
for
flushing
out
East
Gate
and
for
flushing
out
the
further
work
that
council
directed
some
time
ago
about
the
siting
of
Lincoln,
Center,
om,
Fe
and
East
Gate
I
would
be
very
appreciative
because
I
know
it's
been
kind
of
stalled
for
a
moment
or
at
least
stalled
publicly
for
a
while
and
I'd
like
to
see
that
come
back.
So
thanks
very
much
I
really
appreciate
all
the
work.
K
Oh
I
am
sitting
go
ahead.
Thank
you.
I
haven't
said
anything
about
homeless
issue.
Just
talk
about
the
presentations,
so
my
position
on
ECA
homeless
know
that's
pretty
clear
and
I
just
like
to
move
on,
because
we
just
sort
of
presentations.
There's
a
lot
of
discussions,
a
student
to
be
made
so
rather
than
we
don't
time
to
talk
about
it.
We
are
going
to
let's
move
on
for
another
section:
sec,
there's
not
time
to
talk
about
yeah,
all
right,
okay,
it's
not
on
our
agenda,
so
we
should
thank.
A
Yeah
I
think
it's
been
a
good
conversation.
I
get
tickled
at
and
this
always
happens.
People
change
their
minds
or
it's
always.
You
know
things
changed
and
so
I
know
there
was
a
lot
of
agreement
on
all
of
these
things.
We
didn't
talk
about,
including
I,
think
we
knew
what's
going
on
with
the
Tod
we
gave
Authority
and
it's
okay
we'll
find
out.
A
It's
been
a
long,
complicated
process.
We
spent
me
a
time
on
this
and
it's
easy
to
say.
Well,
I,
don't
think
it's
been.
You
know
it's
been
in
the
secret
and
all
this
stuff,
it's
that
that
doesn't
help
the
conversation
a
whole
lot,
because
that's
so
easy
to
say,
particularly
when
it's
not
exactly
accurate,
I
mean
I.
Think
the
speaker
just
talked
to
us
about
you
know
it
doesn't
help
when
something's
presented
in
a
way.
That's
not
exactly
copacetic
with
something's
going
on.
Do
you
think
so?
A
Putting
all
that
aside,
I
mean
we're
trying
to
work
through
this.
It's
very
difficult
and
I
think
what
I
think
Councilmember
seamless
actually
put
a
pretty
good
picture.
The
whole
thing
reality
is
just
like
putting
light
rail
through
the
city.
We
didn't
put
it
decide
it.
We're
not
gonna
put
it
next
to
a
neighborhood,
because
we
didn't
want
those
people,
you
know
to
be
bothered
because
it
will
we'll
put
it
in
the
desert,
so
people
aren't
there.
A
Well,
we
don't
have
those
we
have
to
put
them
where
they
go,
and
that's
why
it's
a
topic
utility
I
think
we
could
probably
put
it
on
both
these
sites.
If
we
keep
it
keep
that
spur
and
use
it
for
this
purpose,
I
think
we
could
put
it
other
places.
We
could
put
it
right
across
the
street
from
112
over
there,
and
all
it
takes
is
money
and
time
we
could
put
in
a
lot
of
places.
A
So
we
have
by
everybody
we
work
to
us
and
we
did
make
decisions.
The
council
members
sometimes
forget.
We
did
make
choices
about
we're
on
different
sites
and
we
looked
at
different
sites.
The
OMF
ii
was
at
that
time.
There's
no
idea.
We'd
even
want
to
do
something
out
there,
because
we
had
no
idea
we're
still
working
of
what
Sound
Transit
was
going
to
do.
We
knew
the
whole
thing,
that's
going
to
be
redeveloped
and
it
wasn't
a
put
upon,
but
it
was
a
conscious
choice,
not
even
pursue
that,
and
we
did
have
five.
A
We
came
in
a
year
ago,
a
year
ago
we
went
to
the
public
and
we
had
over
a
hundred
and
some
people
at
the
at
the
champion
Center,
and
we
put
up
five
different
sites
and
said
this
is
what
we've
been
looking
at,
and
this
is
the
criteria
and
we're
looking.
This
is
the
best
place
based
on
what
we
thought
at
the
time,
and
we've
been
talking
about
that
for
a
year
now
and
we're
still
getting
people
say
it's
been
done
in
secret
and
cetera
said,
and
we
don't
have
any
processed
it.
A
It's
been
all
out
there,
it's
nothing
that
you
don't
that
you
can
it's
not
there
that
you
don't
know
and
hasn't
been
to
discuss.
The
issue
is:
how
do
we
do
this
and
we
are
agreement
that
we
need
to
have
homeless,
shelter
or
shelters
in
the
city
and
we
go
outside
and
we
can
go
on
these
different
processors.
A
I
think
we
look
at
these
when
we
start
looking
at
oh
ma
fee
based
on
past
history,
we
better
have
a
full
public
process
and
we
need
to
get
in
terms
of
where
we're
gonna
city's
gonna
spend
its
money,
and
that
means
other
neighborhoods
and
it
means
where
the
city
as
a
whole
140,000
people
want
to
spend
their
money
because
we're
making
options
between
something
it's
going
to
cost
a
lot
and
Minot
cost
so
much
what
you
know
pros
and
cons.
But
the
ultimate
thing
is
exactly
what
councilman
Racine
is
said.
A
The
issue
is:
how
do
we
do
this
and
make
it
safe,
regardless
of
where
it
goes,
and
we
can
do
that?
We've
talked
about
that
a
lot
people
forget
that.
That's
what
we're
going
to
focus
on
what
we'll
focus
on
and
it
could
be
put
anywhere
in
this
city
anywhere
in
this
city
and
a
choice
has
to
be
made
based
on
criteria,
and
if
you
only
have
one
you
put
it
in
one
place,
you
have
light
rail.
A
You
could
have
put
it
across
in
the
division
line
across
you
know
by
other
neighborhoods
and
across
there
out
of
the
city.
It
was
put
in
one
place
and
we
mitigated
that
excellently
and
we
will
do
the
same
and
it
takes
the
whole
community
working
together
and
not
with
a
negative
attitude
all
along,
because
we
have
to
do
this
and
we
made
a
commitment.
It's
in
our
party,
it's
a
council
to
site
of
this.
A
A
long
time
ago,
we've
been
working
on
this
for
some
time
and
again
the
committee
it's
going
to
happen
somewhere,
or
else
it
is
going
to
come
into
a
situation
that
we
do
not
want
to
think
about,
and
so
we'll
have
to
work
together.
The
people
the
men
are
out
there.
The
people
are
out
there,
they
will
freeze,
they
will
have
problems.
The
interesting
thing
is,
it's
been
noted
that
we
had
a
shelter
over
there
in
by
the
International
Paper
site
and
there
didn't
seem
any
problems
surprised
you
know.
A
So
actually
it's
not
as
scary
as
it's
been
painted.
There
are
ways
to
deal
with
it,
and
we've
talked
about
that
a
lot
there.
Reams
of
paper
about
how
we
work
on
this,
so
if
we
really
want
to
do
this
and
do
it
right
and
whether
it's
in
your
your
neighborhood
and
my
native
heard
of
somebody
else's,
it
has
to
be
done
right
and
we
can
either
work
together
on
it
and
resolve
it.
Or
we
can
continue
to
have
this
kind
of
fruitless
conversation
back
and
forth
and
I
know.
A
Z
A
I
think
we've
we've
talked
about
this.
The
whole
point
of
this
was
have
this
presentation
tonight
we
don't
normally
and
we
bring
things
forward.
Recommendation
has
been
made
by
councilmember
Robertson,
you
know
to
have
some
staff
will
look
at
these
things
and
go
forward
on
it,
and
there
are
just
a
lot
of
issues
and
their
issues
on
the
Tod
development,
as
I
said
they
can
do
it
with
or
without
our
spur.
If
we
do
it
with
the
spur
there,
we
certainly
work
with
them.
A
We
basically
said
you
know,
do
TOD,
we
want
it
and
that's
what
they're
doing
so
all
these
processes
are
in
place.
This
isn't.
This
is
a
very
complex
piece,
we're
working
on
and
the
city's
working
on
it.
So,
let's
work
together
on
it
and
try
to
make
the
best
decisions
for
the
whole
city
and
for
the
people,
our
neighbors
people
like
us
who
might
need
this
in
the
future
of
people
who
need
it
now
and
do
it
the
right
way,
which
we
can
do
so
it's
time
to
move
on
to
another
topic.
B
So
I
believe
we're
at
the
moment
of
the
consent.
Calendar
I'm
just
going
to
note
that
since
we
have
V
state
residents
here
in
the
audience
tonight,
there
is
money
in
here
that
gets
us
to
the
final
PS
ne.
The
plan
specification
and
estimates
on
the
pedestrian
and
bicycle
improvements
along
Newports
way
raises
the
budget
for
that
to
1.4
to
2
million,
and
that's
a
project
that
I
know
people
care
about.
We
had
walked
to
school
here
earlier.
B
There
is
a
acceptance
of
five
hundred
and
fifteen
thousand
dollars
to
support
construction
of
pedestrian
improvements
as
a
condition
of
the
development
of
the
new
will
Burton
Elementary
School,
and
so
that
matches
up
to
the
walk
to
school
and
there's
also
a
sanitary
sewer
replacement
for
the
view.
Crest
neighborhood,
that
is
my
neighborhood
John,
then
I
didn't
know
anything
about
it,
but
I,
don't
think
it's
a
conflict
of
interest,
so
I'm
gonna
still
vote
on
our
sewer
replacement.
A
A
It
has
to
do
with
execution
documents
necessary
to
relinquish
a
water
line
easement
and
a
portion
of
a
sanitary
sewer
easement
located
at
16
to
31,
northeast
12th
place
and
consideration
for
the
granting
of
a
replacement,
easements
the
granting
and
recording
of
such
replacement
easements
being
deemed
in
the
best
interest
of
the
public.
Our
staff.
You
want
to
introduce.
C
AA
Actually
start
us
off
I'm
Iver
McDaniel,
the
real
property
manager.
So,
as
you
may
remember,
back
in
May,
we
we
bought
you
a
new
administrative
procedure
for
the
release
of
easements.
We
did
not
have
a
written
procedure
before
so
we
we
put
that
together
and
receive
direction
to
begin
bringing
some
of
these
easements
forward
under
that
new
procedure.
And
so
since
May
we've
been
working
to
prioritize
those
projects,
get
them
ready
and
reviewed
them
at
the
staff
level
and
now
we're
starting
to
bring
them
forward
to
Council,
and
this
is
the
first
one.
N
Evening,
mayor
and
councilmembers
we'll
keep
this
short
tonight.
I
know
it's
getting
late
tonight.
We're
gonna
provide
you
with
a
short
staff
report
on
this
request
to
release
two
utility
easements
through
the
utilities
development
review
process.
We
receive
the
request
to
release
even's
utilities.
Staff
have
been
working
with
a
developer
and
determined
that
the
redevelopment
of
with
the
redevelopment
these
easements
were
no
longer
needed,
and
new
easements,
covering
the
utilities
on
this
property,
have
been
executed
and
recorded.
N
The
original
easements
were
both
acquired
in
1967
by
the
lake
hills,
sewer
district
in
King,
County,
Water,
District
97
in
the
1970s.
The
city
assumed
both
of
these
districts,
including
all
assets,
real
property
and
easements
on
September
5th
council
set
the
public
hearing
date
change
my
slide
there
on
September
5th
council
set
the
public
hearing
date
and
determined
these
easements
as
surplus
public
notice
was
mailed
to
residents
within
a
500-foot
radius
on
September
18th
and
the
public
hearing
notice
was
published
in
the
newspaper
the
same
day.
N
N
Easement
is
the
sewer,
easement
that's
being
released
and
the
solid
yellow
is
the
water
line
easement
and
then
the
left
or
the
right
side
of
your
screen
there
you
can
see
a
very
small
hatched
area
is
a
new
sewer
easement
that
we've
acquired
and
the
very
large
green
area
is
a
new
water
line.
Easement
that's
been
already
signed
and
recorded
for
this
development.
A
A
B
A
It
sounds
like
a
very
reasonable
proposition
and
kudos
to
the
staff
for
working
with
that,
and
it
looks
like
actually
the
new
easements
will
be
much
more
useful
and
make
it
much
more
a
Bible
project.
So
that's
great
all
right.
No,
not
yet
not
yet
I
just
want
to
know
if
anybody
else
had
anything
to
say
all
right.
No,
but.
A
All
right,
all
those
in
favor,
say
aye
aye,
nose,
motion
carries
unanimously
and
the
resolutions
adopted.
So
there
are
no
other
items
scheduled
on
tonight's
agenda.
So
for
those
people
who
have
wait
around
there
brings
us
to
Adam
to
item
13
continued
all
communications.
We
have
20
minutes
and
same
rules.
Mister.
B
X
X
One
I'd
like
to
see
a
vote.
Will
we
or
will
we
not
do
more
and
when
I
say,
do
more
I
mean
we're
talking
about
King,
County
Congress
will
homeless.
Imagine
housing
the
original
program.
Was
we
look
at
them
and
we
say
we
here's
the
site.
Go
for
it.
Will
you
step
back
right,
so
we
have
to
decide
what
we're
gonna
do
more.
Are
we
gonna
be
involved
in
it,
whether
it's
an
east
gate
or
Lincoln
Center
or
wherever?
We
need
to
decide
if
we're
gonna
do
more.
X
Then
I
understand
that
Lincoln
Center
is
not
useful
as
a
year-round
site.
I
heard
that
somewhere,
okay,
how
long
is
the
only
consider
useful
as
a
year-round
site
I
thought
that
we
said
that
we
could
use
it
for
a
year-round
for
a
few
years
down.
So
I
want
to
clarify
that,
because
one
of
the
things
that
keeps
getting
confusing
in
this
whole
situation
is
they
keep
saying
Winter
Shelter,
permanent,
Winter,
Shelter
I
want
to
make
sure
that
we
understand
it's,
not
a
winter
shelter.
X
It's
a
shelter,
we're
not
gonna
kick
those
people
out
next
summer,
because
when
I
hear
people
in
the
council
forums,
sometimes
candidate
forums,
they're
talking
about
like
we
don't
have.
This
is
like
almost
as
if
this
is
the
only
shelter
and
they're
out
on
the
streets
right
now,
they're
out
on
the
streets
right
now,
because
we
kicked
them
out
in
April
right.
We
have
a
better
problem
right
now,
because
I'm
out
in
April
we
didn't
keep
them
in.
We
don't
have
a
place
for
him
right
now
until
well.
X
Maybe
I
don't
know
what
the
dates
are.
It's
October!
Then
we
talk
about
supportive
housing,
there's
different
kinds
of
supportive
housing.
What
kind
of
support
of
house
are
we
doing
we're
doing
transitional
housing?
Are
we
doing
affordable
housing?
Are
we
doing
what
housing
first?
Are
we
doing
housing
first?
What
are
we
doing
what's
the
day
center?
What's
it
all
about
what
you
know,
if
we,
we
can't
have
separate
how
we're
going
to
deal
with
it
if
it's
like
to
just
separate
shelters
and
the
Tod
resident.
X
A
T
My
name
is
Ted
go
astana.
My
address
is
on
record
a
couple
of
comments
regarding
the
distance
to
residential
units,
there's
a
big
difference
between
east
gate
and
the
oil
omniauth
ome
outside
the
in
the
East
Keith's
case.
You
have
your
putting
the
shelter
next
to
existing
units.
I've
been
living
there
for
more
than
ten
years.
I
didn't
have
a
choice:
I'd,
never
anticipated
that
it
would
be
a
shelter,
a
bother
it
the
distance,
it's
like
200
or
300
feet,
I'm
the
first
neighbor
of
the
proposed
side.
T
In
the
case
of
the
om
left
side,
future
residents
have
a
choice
whether
they
want
to
live
next
to
shot
or
not.
So
there
is
no
comparison,
I
guess
regarding
the
distance
as
to
the
residential
units,
in
case
of
the
OMF
side,
to
escape
a
couple
of
comments.
Also,
regarding
deputy
mayor's
presentations,
we're
going
to
get
public
process,
there
was
no
public
process.
T
The
public
was
notified
after
the
sched
shelter
was
already
selected
mayor
mention
that
the
alternative
sites
were
prison
in
Champions
Center
meetings,
and
these
videos
are
public.
The
alternative
sites
were
presented
after
public
pressure
in
the
second
meeting.
This
was
just
a
showing
that
some
other
attractive
sites
were
considered.
The
champion
sentiment.
Meaning
was
not
the
venue
that
decide.
T
Alternative
sites
were
analyzed,
they
were
just
like
something
that
was
presented,
I
think
just
to
present
something
in
the
second
meeting,
not
in
the
first
meeting
I
am
the
person
of
archway
I've
been
technology
about
four
years
on
September
8th
of
2016.
We
got
this
email
from
Kaiser
and
Lotus
development
partners
that
works
for
City
of
Bellevue
and
ncfh
like
I'm
quickly
going
to
read
it
back.
T
You
know
I'm
working
with
the
City
of
Bellevue
neighborhood
outreach,
team
and
congressional
homeless
and
on
the
public
outreach
process
for
a
man's
homeless,
shelter
on
the
ground
of
the
King
County
Public
Health.
This
is
a
partnership
between
the
city
of
Belleville,
congressional
for
homeless,
King,
County,
King,
County,
Public,
Health
and
imagine
housing.
The
project
would
be
new.
Construction
include
100,
bed
men's
shelter
as
well
as
a
day
center,
a
permanent,
supportive
housing
like
it's
a
long
email.
So
this
is
September
of
2016.
T
This
is
before
champions
Center
meetings,
that
this
was
only
decided
without
any
public
knowledge.
There
was
no
public
process,
I
mean
the
proof
if
someone
says
that,
but
that's
not
the
case
regarding
the
deputy
mayor
said
that
there
was
a
unanimous
approval
by
the
city
cancer
on
the
adopting
a
skate
zoning
I.
Think
that
was
a
trickery
like
no
I
mean
I.
Think
some
of
you
remember
Danny
times
of
circa.
A
O
Hi
I'm
Riley,
I'm,
Laurel
Itoh
my
mind.
Everything
is
on
file.
You've.
Seen
me
lots
of
times.
I
usually
have
something
prepared,
but
I
was
so
excited
and
really
angry
for
two
different
reasons.
So
I
felt
compelled
to
speak
councilmember
Wallace.
That
was
beautiful.
It
solves
so
many
problems,
it
solves
I
mean
I,
won't
look
at
you,
but
but
it
solves
so
many
of
the
problems
that
we
have
been
looking
to
solve
in
this
in
the
city
concerning
homelessness.
O
It
is
near
the
hospitals,
you
know
I've
spoken
about
this
before
it
is
in
your
emergency
rooms.
It
is
near
medical,
it
is
mere
methadone
clinics.
It
is
near.
It
is
near
the
police
station.
It
is
near
everything
that
these
folks
could
need
it's
bigger
than
anyone
had
thought
it
is
more
organized
than
anyone
had
thought
it
is
being
put
in
before
anything
else
is
being
put
in.
So
mitigation
can
happen.
It
is.
It
is
wonderful,
so
I
just
want
to
say
something
that
that
I
was
very
very
pleased
with
that.
I'm.
O
Sorry
that
the
council
member
Tom
niak
is
not
here.
I
wanted
to
share
how
his
hypocrisy
is.
So
overt
and
in
that
he
will
do
anything
to
keep
this
out
of
his
special
spring
district.
It
is
a
perfect
place
for
this
and
in
terms
of
the
Eastgate
I
looked
at
that
agreement
today.
Just
today
it
is
an
on.
It
was
clear
that
it
was
a
non-binding
agreement.
There
was
a
lot
of
I
looked
at
the
boy
as
this
stuff
that
came
out.
It
is
a
non-binding
agreement.
O
It
was
clear
that
it
was
put
in
place
so
that
there
would
be
a
discussion
and
so
that
something
could
be
moved
forward
to
start
studying
this,
that
something
needed
to
be,
but
it
wasn't
if
there
was
nothing
in
there
that
made
it
seem
that
it
had
to
be
an
east
gate.
So
I
just
think
you
know
I
always
shake
when
I
get
up
here,
but
I
think
that
this
is
a
great
opportunity
for
the
homeless
in
our
community.
O
This
is
a
great
opportunity
for
Bellevue
and
I
think
that
that
we
can
make
that
work
and
it
would
fit
with
the
King
County
plan
that
that
the
consultants
that
they
paid
for
the
consultants
to
come
back
with
this
would
fit
with
that
regional
plan
and
anything
that
that
stone
was
that
I'm
just
I'm
just
at
a
loss,
I
just
don't
get
it.
So.
Thank
you.
Thank.
U
H
H
Actually,
it
was
councilman
chun
MEAC
that
inspired
me
to
talk
as
well.
So
you
know
Syd
said
it
more
eloquently
than
I
can
and
I,
don't
need
to
repeat
it,
and
hopefully
the
deputy
mayor
will
watch
this.
You
mentioned
that
there
was
an
extensive
process.
It's
simply
disingenuous
that
when
he
says
something
like
that,
especially
after
you
hear
everything
that
there
are
almost
isn't
anyone
who
comes
up
who
speaks
differently,
you
know
councilman
Robinson.
You
made
a
comment
about
that
main
reason
that
people
seem
to
be
against
this
or
fighting
it
is
poor.
H
Siting
of
the
shelter
I'd
actually
argue
that
it's
not
that
that
the
problem
has
been
the
process
that
the
council
has
chosen
to
adopt
for
whatever
reason.
So
there
are
just
so
many
things.
You
know,
deputy
mayor
again
mentioned
a
unanimous
vote
for
approval
of
zoning.
What
an
incredible
use
of
smoke
and
mirrors
right
in
this
meeting,
I'm
listening
and
watching
he
said
very
straightforward
at
that
meeting.
This
doesn't
mean
we're
citing
the
product
the
the
place
here.
H
This
doesn't
mean
he
calmed
the
community
down
and
now
very
conveniently
it's
a
single
line
that
says
unanimous
vote.
You
all
voted
for
it
just
remember
that
the
the
concept
and
the
idea
of
the
sound
transit
betrayal
of
usurping
the
MFE
sight
so
personally,
I
find
it
fascinating
that
nowhere
in
this
conversation
is
the
Eastgate
Tod
that
you
all
approved,
approved
it
and
we
talked
about
affordable
and
what
a
great
idea
and
concept
that
could
solve
a
lot
of
these
issues,
but
it
seems
to
have
disappeared
in
this
process.
H
You
know
again,
it
was
said
before,
but
the
deputy
mayor
never
ceases
to
miss
an
opportunity
to
disagree
with
the
siting
of
the
shelter
in
the
oMFG
site.
I'd
like
to
know
why
I'm
curious,
because
I've
never
really
heard
this.
This
is
a
blank
slate
right
now,
okay,
compared
to
another,
to
two
other
sites,
so
it'd
be
great.
H
AB
AB
No
one
visited
our
townhomes
to
let
us
know
this
was
going
to
be
built,
I
had
to
learn
from
a
local
paper
and
when
an
hour
tell
homes,
it
was
one
of
the
first
ones
that
met
with
the
city
staff.
As
part
of
that
public
outreach
we
reached
out
to
the
city
staff
at
that
meeting.
I
apparently
asked
during
the
staff
come
around
and
walked
the
property,
the
nearby
properties,
to
know
how
its
laid
out
and
how
its
boast
we
are
to
the
shelter.
The
answer
was
no
to
me.
That
was
unacceptable.
AB
AB
What
are
you
proposing
is
so
unfair
to
us
I
invite
all
of
you
to
come
and
rock
the
property
with
us
go
to
Sunset
Ridge
come
to
harmony
and
see.
Let
us
know
how
do
you
plan
to
mitigate
by
saving
the
shelter
because
we
are
truly
exposed,
then
there's
no
way
you
can
put
in
security
systems
like
the
high-rises
around
here.
R
R
We
don't
vote
for
magic
housing
to
speak
for
us,
so
for
any
of
those
entities
to
be
having
closed-door
meetings
with
staff
and
council
members
about
something
that's
going
to
affect
Bellevue
residents
and
not
have
any
Bellevue
residents
present
to
represent
their
own
interests.
That's
unacceptable,
and
that
is
what
happened
for
two
years
before
this
was
ever
rolled
out
to
the
public.
R
Now
I,
don't
know
if
the
deputy
mayor
thinks
we're
stupid
or
if
he
forgets
that
counts
meetings
are
taped,
but
I
clearly
remember
that
meeting
and
I
believe
it
was
August.
1St
I,
don't
remember
the
exact
date.
It
was
in
August
when
the
the
plan
for
the
Eastgate
Tod
was
presented
after
the
Planning
Commission
had
voted
on
it
and
I.
R
Remember
because
I
remember
your
face
when
it
was
ruled
out
and
the
look
of
surprise
on
your
face
and
how
you
had
to
ask
councilmember
Wallace,
because
nobody
knew
you
didn't
know
you
didn't
know,
and
you
didn't
know
the
Eastgate
had
had
been
specifically
targeted
as
the
site
for
a
shelter
so
and
I.
Remember,
specifically
Planning
Commission,
Chair
Jared
haces
face
and
how
uncomfortable
he
was
when
he
was
asked
by
You
councilmember
Wallace.
R
If
the
Planning
Commission
knew
about
the
shelter
at
the
time
that
they
were
making
their
vote
and
their
recommendation
and
that's
devoted
that
you
build
the
mansion
there,
because
there
were
people
present
for
that.
So
all
this
smoke
a
mirror
again
with
the
deputy
mayor
saying
that
we
need
to
move
forward.
It's
been
going
on.
There's
been
plenty
of
input
from
this.
No,
no!
No!
No-
and
this
is
exactly
what
I
talked
to
you
about
last
week.
Yes,.
W
Sorry
I'm
it
set
to
the
first
thing:
I
want
to
say:
is
it's
not
my
backyard?
If
I
use
the
standard
of
the
due
diligence
report,
my
home
is
about
25,000
miles
away
from
East
Gate,
that's
by
intercontinental
ballistic
missile.
The
due
diligence
report
states
that
the
shelter
site
in
East
Gate
is
2,500
feet
by
car.
Now,
why
would
you
expect
the
homeless
man
to
take
a
car?
W
W
So
the
do
jeweler's
report
states
that
by
putting
a
nice
gate,
it's
going
to
prime
the
pump
of
East
Gate,
it
hasn't
primed
any
pump
for
will
Burton
neighborhood
I
have
gone
to
as
many
meetings
as
I
can
I
specifically
remember
the
first
public
meeting
and
people
there
were
like
what
else
did
you
look
at
and
Cameron
Parker
said
this
is
the
only
place
so
we
protested
and
at
the
second
meeting,
Dan
Stroh
presented
three
sites.
I,
remember
the
transfer
station.
Oh,
that
was
the
next
to
of
school.
W
What
school
a
dance
school
and
I
don't
wish
it
upon
them
to
be
so
close
to
a
homeless,
shelter
site,
but
I
do
volunteer
work
right
next
to
that
school.
The
kids
are
referred
right
next
to
that,
it's
not
a
security
risk.
The
other
was
the
fire
station
up
at
it
by
148,
156
and
all
of
the
properties
that
I've
seen
compared
to
east
gate
are
left
over
useless
properties.