►
From YouTube: Bothell Planning Commission Meeting - July 19, 2023
Description
0:00:10 - Call to Order
0:04:00 - Public Comments
0:09:45 - Approval of Minutes: June 21, 2023
0:10:45 - Public Hearing (continued): Downtown Transition Affordable Housing Overlay (DTAHO) Voluntary Incentives Comprehensive Plan and Code Amendments
1:47:25 - Reports from Staff
2:05:15 - Reports from Members/Items to Report to Council
A
A
A
Before
we
move
on
to
the
agenda
items
I'd
like
to
acknowledge
our
hybrid
meeting
format,
City
Bothell
is
providing
the
option
to
attend
this
meeting,
either
in
person
or
remotely
via
Zoom
for
those
participating
via
Zoom.
The
chat
and
question
functions
are
not
available
to
ensure
compliance
with
the
open
public
meetings.
Act.
We
have
a
public
comment
agenda
item
at
the
beginning
of
the
meeting.
This
time
is
for
comments
on
issues
not
on
tonight's
agenda.
Please
limit
these
comments
to
three
minutes.
A
We
will
be
using
lights
to
signal
right
over
there,
those
lights
to
Signal
available
time
when
the
yellow
light
appears
com
matches
will
have
about
20
seconds
to
continue
to
conclude,
when
the
red
light
appears,
your
time
is
up.
Please
note
that
the
city
of
Bothell
does
not
tolerate
verbal
harassment.
Please
remember
this
during
your
comments.
A
Public
comment
and
hearing
testimony
will
be
allowed,
both
in
person
and
Via
Zoom.
Those
wishing
to
comment
via
Zoom
were
asked
to
submit
an
online
form
by
3
pm
today.
People
wishing
to
submit
written
comments
were
also
asked
to
submit
those
comments
by
3
pm
and
we
did
receive
some
comments
today.
Email
may
also
be
used
to
make
comments
and
if
you
are
interested,
please
use
the
sign
in
sheets
and
let
us
know
the
Imagine,
Bothell
notice,
City
website
and
tonight's
agenda,
all
provided
information
to
the
public
for
providing
comments.
A
A
call-in
number
was
provided
on
the
meeting
agenda
for
members
of
the
public
who
wish
to
call
on
by
phone
and
listen
live
to
the
meeting
for
our
phone
in
callers
during
staff
presentations.
The
staff
will
make
every
effort
to
specify
which
materials
they're
referencing
so
that
everyone
can
follow
along.
At
this
point,
I'd
like
to
like
to
acknowledge
the
attendance
of
members.
A
Commissioner
Jones
present
commissioner
westerbeck
here,
commissioner
kurd
here,
commissioner
Robson
is
absent
and
excused
commissioner
Anders
here
and
commissioner
Gustafson
here.
In
addition
tonight
we
have
Deputy
community
development,
director,
Ashley
Winchell,
community
development,
director
Jason
Greenspan
and
Senior
planner
Dave
Boyd
in
attendance.
Lastly,
before
we
begin
I'd
like
to
reiterate
some
meeting
guidelines
for
all
meeting
attendees,
please
speak
clearly
and
pause,
frequently
state
your
name
each
time
before
speaking,
mute
your
microphone
when
not
speaking,
if
you
are
also
streaming
the
live,
video
feed.
A
A
Each
person
is
solely
responsible
for
their
comments,
but
speaking
about
your
own
campaign
could
be
a
violation
of
campaign
laws
which
the
public
disclosure
commission
would
determine
for
Commissioners
at
specific
breaks
in
the
presentation,
I'll
be
calling
on
members
who
wish
to
speak
or
ask
a
question
if
you
want
to
speak,
please
indicate
this
by
raising
your
hand
and
I
will
call
on
you
as
I,
see
you.
This
will
help
avoid
the
problem
of
having
two
people
speaking
at
this.
A
At
the
same
time,
identify
yourself
before
you
ask
a
question:
make
a
motion,
second
emotion
or
participate
in
debate,
and
please
mute
your
microphone
when
not
speaking
so.
The
first
agenda
item
tonight
is
public
comment.
The
city
has
accepted
visitor
comment
in
writing,
as
well
as
accepted
sign
up
sheets
for
those
who
wish
to
attend
tonight's
meeting.
Written
comments
submitted
to
staff
no
later
than
3
pm
today
were
forwarded
to
all
Council
Commissioners
and
are
part
of
the
agenda.
This
time
is
for
items
not
on
tonight's
agenda.
B
B
So
there
will
be
a
time
to
speak
for
that,
and
then
this
is
just
for
General
comments
for
tonight's,
okay,
Katie
inquist,
okay,
Catherine,
Covell
e,
all
right,
Rossler,
plantilla,
okay
and
then
there's
one
attendee,
but
they
have
told
us
they'd
like
to
speak
during
the
public
hearing.
So
if
anyone
else
would
like
to
speak,
they
can
approach
the
microphone.
B
E
G
G
G
That's
what
it
says!
That's
what
you're
held
to
that's,
what
you've
sworn
to
uphold
your
duty
to
now.
We've
built
a
lot
of
social
equity
in
this
town
through
the
last
40,
50
or
60
years.
I
mean
a
lot.
That's
why
bothell's
a
pleasant
place
to
live,
but
that's
social
equity
is
not
for
you
guys
to
slice
and
dice
and
then
divide
it
up
and
hand
it
over
to
real
estate
Developers,
who
are
just
voraciously,
trying
to
get
their
vacation
condo
in
Maui.
H
G
G
A
Excuse
me:
yes,
anyone
can
come.
This
is
for
comments
not
on
the
housing
amendments.
You
know
there
will
be
a
period,
a
public
hearing
as
part
of
those
amendments
which
will
come
up,
but
this
is
the
public
comment
period
which
is
expressly
for
items
not
on
tonight's
agenda,
even
though
that's
sometimes
bent,
but
any
Zoom
commenters.
B
A
A
Been
moved
and
seconded
to
adopt
the
minutes
of
the
until
June
21st
meeting
as
submitted.
Is
there
any
comment
around
any
discussion
around
those
minutes,
seeing
none
all
in
favor
approval
of
the
minutes?
Please
say:
aye
aye
aye
aye.
We
have
six
Commissioners
in
favor.
The
minutes
of
the
June
21st
meeting
are
adopted.
A
The
next
item
on
our
agenda
is
a
public
hearing
on
the
downtown
transition,
affordable
housing,
overlay,
voluntary
incentives
and
comprehensive
plan
and
code
amendments.
It's
a
mouthful
and
you
can't
even
pronounce
the
acronym
so
with
that
I'll
turn
it
over
to
senior
planner
Boyd
and
we'll
open
the
hearing.
C
C
C
So
I
just
wanted
to
touch
again
on
public
notification.
This
we
we
did
a
courtesy
mailing
to
all
addresses
within
500
feet
of
the
downtown
transition,
affordable,
housing
overlay.
That's
not
strictly
required
for
an
area-wide
code
plan
and
code
Amendment
like
this,
but
that
has
been
our
our
practice.
There
are
also
notice
boards
on
the
the
subject,
property
and,
and
at
the
beginning
this
was
paired
with
another
one
at
the
head
of
Hall
Road.
C
In
2018
we
passed
a
housing
strategy
that
that
prioritize,
creating
more
affordable
housing
opportunities
and
requirements
where
possible.
Basically,
we
can
require
affordable
housing
when
we
increase
the
capacity,
and
so
the
density
limit
was
removed
from
the
orange
area,
with
black
cross
hatch
at
that
time
and
affordable
housing
requirements
were
added.
Those
are
they
require
for
a
development
of
five
or
more
units
to
provide
10
percent
of
the
the
units
as
affordable
at
a
level
of
60
percent
of
area,
median
income
for
rentals
and
eighty
percent
for
ownership
housing.
C
So
that's
that's
the
current
how
the
code
stands
now
and
some
of
the
background
on
that
in
October
of
2021,
we
received
an
application
from
Dave
and
Connie
Drews
to
rezone
five
Parcels
that
they
purchased
shown
here
as
the
project
site
and
and
add
a
voluntary,
affordable
housing
incentive
that
would
apply
in
their
their
application.
They
suggested
apply
to
the
entire
downtown
transition
District.
C
They
proposed
that
those
incentives
be
used,
even
if
the
entire
development
is
not
affordable
and
they
proposed
50
threshold
and
they
also
proposed
a
couple
of
conditions
that
would
relate
to
that
and
and
and
other
amendments
to
allow
the
voluntary
incentives
as
we
studied
their
application.
We
asked
them
for
for
more
background
material
showing
what
they
proposed
to
do,
so
that
we
could
make
sure
that
the
codes
the
Amendments
would
would
address
those.
C
We
also
looked
at
the
the
current
zoning
here,
which
is
shown
here,
and
basically,
the
changes
that
would
be
made
would
be
removing
the
or
basically
expanding
the
downtown
sub-area
to
include
the
five
parcels
and
making
them
part
of
the
downtown
transition
district
and
the
downtown
transition,
affordable,
housing
overlay,
as
shown
in
the
blue
borders.
Here,
if
we
can
see
those,
the
Drew's
proposal
is
shown
here.
A
massing
diagram
of
their
proposal,
which
has
two
levels
of
parking.
C
We've
made
it
adjustment
in
the
code
amendments
to
only
allow
an
additional
two
floors
in
a
situation
where
the
the
new
development
is
at
least
two
floors
below
the
surrounding
the
nearest
surrounding
residence,
and
so
here
you
see
the
view
from
the
the
West
or
the
Southwest
looking
Northeast,
and
so
the
building
would
be
more
or
less
in
scale.
With
the
pop
and
the
the
surrounding
residences
are
shown
in
the
lower
left
and
upper
left
of
this
image.
C
And
then
these
are
some
comments
that
came
from
the
Drews
following
their
application.
One
one
issue
that
came
up
were
our
retaining
wall
regulations
which
are
retaining
structure
regulations
as
they're
referred
to
in
the
code,
and
they
showed
these
examples
from
the
Villas
at
Beardsley
development,
on
the
left
and
also
in
the
center
there
later.
They.
They
also
pointed
out
the
Ross
Road
apartments
and
and
what
they
were
building
there.
That's
still
under
construction.
C
But
so
we
did
look
at
that
and
we
discussed
that
with
staff,
and
there
was
there
were
some
recent
revisions
to
the
retaining
wall
regulations
that
would
make
these
walls
on
the
left
non-conforming.
But
the
the
example
in
the
in
the
center
seemed
to
be
something
that
that
wouldn't
make
sense
and
and
that
there
was
support
on
staff
to
make
amendments
to
the
retaining
wall.
Regulations
which
we've
included
here
and
those
would
apply
Citywide
and
then
on.
C
C
So
those
amendments
are
shown
here
for
a
non-engineered
retaining
wall
it
would
have
to
be.
The
base
of
the
retaining
wall
would
have
to
have
a
one-to-one
slope
up
to
the
grade
at
the
property
line.
As
shown
in
this
diagram
and
for
an
engineered
retaining
wall,
they
could
build
it
within
a
foot
of
the
property
line.
C
C
So
here's
the
illustration
of
how
that
works.
The
additional
height
allowed
is
19
feet
up
from
35
to
the
the
what
was
studied
in
the
Eis
of
54
feet
and
that's
enough
for
up
to
two
stories.
You
can
only
do
that
if
your
average
grade
plane
of
the
Noose
construction
is
at
least
19
feet
below
the
the
nearest
grade,
elevation
of
the
nearest
Residence.
C
C
C
Median
income
and
that's
the
using
the
average
of
50
is
what
we
did
in
the
other
voluntary
incentive
program
in
sr522,
so
that
they
had
the
flexibility
to
provide
some
units
at
30
percent,
Ami
and
and
Summit
at
60
percent
Ami.
That
was
an
entirely
affordable
housing
project
being
funded
by
affordable
housing
grants
that
had
different
levels
of
affordable
affordability
in
their
requirements.
So
the
the
flexibility
was
important.
C
Since
the
last
hearing,
we've
had
some
comments
and
a
few
things
came
up.
One
had
to
do
with
micro
Apartments.
The
The
Proposal
is
for
essentially
for
micro
Apartments,
which
are
small
efficiency
units
with
that
all
have
their
own
bathroom
and
a
food
prep
area,
but
not
a
full
kitchen
and
then
there's
a
shared
kitchen
on
each
floor.
C
Under
previous
code
amendments,
we
we
made
some
adjustments
to
permit
micro
Apartments,
but
there
was
an
oversight
and
a
minimum
size
was
not
specified
in
the
code
so
that
we've
added
that
here
at
250
square
feet,
which
is
very
comparable
to
surrounding
jurisdiction.
Some
are
a
little
bit
lower.
Some
are
a
bit
higher.
C
The
micro
apartment
affordability
was
based
on
recent
projects
in
in
Kirkland,
Shoreline
and
Redmond,
and,
and
it
is
just
a
slightly
lower
than
the
market
rate
for
that
type
of
unit,
but
it
would
establish
a
contact
and
contractual
affordability
limit
that
would
last
for
the
life
of
the
project
so
and
Mike
Stanger
from
Arch
who's
done
done.
The
affordability
analysis
for
us
is
here
tonight
and
and
can
answer
more
detailed
questions
about
that.
C
Want
to
touch
on
parking
reductions,
as
I
stated,
we've
made
some
State
mandated
Provisions
that
include
reduction
for
a
senior
and
special
needs
housing
in
proximity
to
frequent
Transit.
This
will
be
less
than
a
quarter
mile
from
the
projected
Sound
Transit
VRT
station
near
the
library.
The
current
code
allows
a
parking
reduction
to
0.3
spaces
per
unit
as
justified
by
a
parking
study.
C
The
thinking
there
is
that
many
of
these
residents
will
not
own
cars,
but
a
parking
requirement
is
required
for
staff
and
visitors
and
again
this
is
a
mix
of
of
special
needs,
housing
and
and
market
rate
housing.
So
there
there
will
be
a
need
in
the
parking
study
did
indicate
that
about
0.34
spaces
would
be
required.
C
Another
comment
that
we've
received
recently
is:
why
doesn't
the
code
require
a
certain
percentage
of
special
needs?
Housing,
the
that's
not
considered
to
be
necessary
because
the
parking
requirement
does
that
for
us,
basically
that
so
that
if
this
project
is
approved
with
a
reduced
parking
requirement,
that
would
become
part
of
the
the
contract
or
the
Covenant
that
that
the
development
would
have
to
sign
before
they
they
gain
occupancy.
And
it
would
it
would
carry
through
for
the
life
of
the
project,
just
like
the
affordability
Provisions.
C
C
So
just
this
afternoon,
I
forwarded
some
responses
to
those
suggestions
from
our
public
works
department
and
they
basically
had
two
two
made
major
points.
We
do
require
traffic
impact
fees
with
projects
and
those
do
go
towards
projects
identified
in
our
transportation,
Improvement
program
and,
and
those
include
things
like
safe
routes
to
schools
and
and
and
other
improvements
that
have
been
identified
as
as
a
need,
and
the
purpose
for
that
is.
Is
that
that
that
those
monies
go
to
the
the
the
areas
of
where
the
need
is
greatest.
C
As
far
as
direct
improvements
done
by
the
the
development,
those
are
limited
by
rules
that
have
been
established
in
in
state
law
and
in
case
law,
and
basically
they
they
there
needs
to
be
a
Nexus.
There
needs
to
be
a
direct
connection
between
the
impact
of
the
project
and
and
the
requirement
the
improvements
that
are
required
and
they
have
to
be
proportional.
They
have
to.
They
can't
go
beyond
any
impact
of
the
project.
C
I
do
want
to
acknowledge
that
the
just
since
the
the
June
20
second
hearing
we've
received
a
number
of
comments.
A
number
of
them
were
form
letters
and
so
I've
I've,
just
included,
tried
to
include
just
one
copy
of
that
and
and
our
response
to
that
and
and
then
list
the
other
all
the
folks
that
had
submitted
those.
So
those
I
enter
into
the
record
tonight.
F
Sarah
Gustafson
here
senior
planner
Boyd
I'm
wondering
if
you
could
speak
to
the
idea
of
spot
zoning
I
feel
that
many
of
the
audience
members
have
voice
support
for
Drew's
and
not
for
the
entire
de
Tahoe
amendments.
Would
you
be
able
to
help
us
explain
why
it
would
have
to
be
area-wide
instead
of
just
at
the
Drew's
property.
C
So
we
do
try
to
avoid
anything
that
could
be
challenged
as
spot
zoning,
special
zoning
just
for
a
single
property
or
a
set
of
properties
under
a
single
ownership.
Beyond
that,
our
code
doesn't
have
Provisions
for
either
contract
rezones
or
development
agreements.
We
do
have
Provisions
for
development
agreements,
but
they're
gen.
They
generally
have
been
used
only
for
properties
that
the
city
has
sold
for
development
and
there
aren't.
We
didn't
feel
like
there
was
a
a
good
path
to
making
amendments
that
would
only
apply
to
these
these
properties.
J
See
no
planner
Boyd
I,
wonder
if
you
could
help
me
with
a
portion
of
the
analysis
where
it
talks
about
the
rezone
of
juice,
parcel
on
page
28
and
towards
the
end
it
says,
based
on
similar
site
access
and
characteristics,
staff
has
found
that
Tahoe
to
be
an
appropriate
designation.
What
are
the?
What
are
the
other
examples
of
sites
with
similar
access
and
characteristics
and
I'm?
Assuming
when
you
say
characteristics
you
mean
topography,
you
mean
foliage,
you
mean
other
types
of
issues.
J
J
C
Yeah
I
think
all
along
West
Hill
are
properties
that
but
residential
only
zoning
that
is
up
the
hill
up,
West
Hill
from
from
downtown
the
topography,
gets
less
steep
as
you
go
further
south.
So
our
analysis,
for
example,
at
the
very
south
end,
was
that
there
probably
would
only
be
about
a
tenth
foot
differential
between
a
new
development
and
and
the
adjacent
single-family
zone.
A
A
H
Great
all
right,
yeah
just
got
a
couple
statements
here:
I
don't
have
anything
personally
against
any
of
you
guys
or
the
Drews.
We
just
have
concerns
and
we
want
to
voice
those
concerns
and
I'll
start
my
statement
public.
My
name
is
baracker
resident
of
Bothell
Publix
being
told
here
that
this
project
is
about
housing.
Folks
with
idd
I,
actually
didn't
hear
anything
about
that
planner
Boyd.
Until
the
latter
half
of
your
statements,
I,
don't
know
if
that's
changed,
but
only
50
of
the
capacity
is
being
allocated
to
that.
H
H
The
proposer
purchased
lots
that
rely
on
the
city
to
change
existing
code
so
that
the
public
can
make
it
pencil
out
for
them
so
I'm,
assuming
they
knew
of
this
risk
and
this
dependency
before
they
bought
these
Lots
Publix
being
told
that
it's
just
like
the
same
a
project
and
if
you
look
in
your
packet
today,
you'll
see
salmon
mentioned
about
half
a
dozen
times,
but
it's
100
nothing
like
salmon,
where
100
of
the
housing
is
Affordable.
If
it's
not
the
same,
please
stop
mentioning
it
and
stop
misleading
and
confusing
the
public.
H
This
is
not
about
five-story
buildings
adjacent
to
residential
homes,
and
yet
these
area-wide
amendments,
if
approved,
would
enable
these
projects,
like
the
Carlson
project,
that
you
guys
don't
want
to
talk
about
to
move
forward
with
far
less
scrutiny.
So,
yes,
this
is
about
five-story
apartments
adjacent
to
residential
homes.
Telling
us
it's
not
is
misleading
and
inaccurate.
I
know
many
of
you
on
the
commission.
H
H
How
about
we
do
a
walking
tour,
the
transitional
Zone
perimeter,
so
you
guys
can
see
the
Drew
site
and
the
Carlson
site
and
all
the
other
sites
that
would
be
enabled
by
developers
to
build
apartment
complexes
up
against
residential
homes
and
force
residents
to
live
within
an
apartment,
building,
15
feet
away
from
their
property
or
force
them
to
sell
their
home
to
that
developer,
to
avoid
being
stuck
in
that
situation.
So
why
don't
we
go
knock
on
some
doors
and
see
how
they
feel
about
that
potential.
A
D
D
D
I
have
a
small
grandson
who
luckily
lives
right
next
door
to
me
and
we
have
many
children
I,
don't
want
a
five-story
building
cutting
off
my
son,
my
Heir
and
my
and
cutting
down
the
trees
in
my
neighborhood.
Do
we
want
Basel
to
look
like
Lake,
City,
Redmond
and
Northgate?
These
are
soulless
and
Bleak
neighborhoods.
D
K
Hi,
my
name
is
Katie
inquist,
so
before
we
consider
such
drastic
code
changes,
I
think
it's
really
important
to
understand
the
desired
goal
and
I'm
honestly
not
sure
what
that
is
what
is
truly
driving
this
in
the
agenda.
I
see
a
lot
of
things.
First,
it's
supposedly
more
affordable
housing.
Is
it
really
affordable,
while
the
total
projected
price
for
these
micro
units
might
be
within
the
acceptable,
affordable
level?
K
The
actual
price
per
square
foot
is
pretty
high
at
over
five
dollars
per
square
foot
and
based
on
this
price
per
square
foot,
it
would
be
like
charging
nearly
twenty
seven
hundred
dollars
for
a
500
square
foot
studio
in
Bothell,
so
these
numbers
have
hardly
been
touched
on
in
any
of
these
meetings
and
I'm
curious
as
to
why
it
hasn't
been
discussed
further
in
the
agenda.
It
also
states
that
there's
evidence
of
demand
for
micro
units,
like
these,
have
any
of
you
seen
or
reviewed
this
evidence.
If
not,
why
not?
K
All
I've
heard
all
I've
heard
is
that
developers
and
the
two
colleges
are
requesting
it,
so
that
doesn't
seem
like
a
good
enough
basis
for
me.
Unfortunately,
our
amenities
in
Bothell
are
lacking
and
I
find
it
hard
to
believe
that
there
is
a
substantial
and
con
that
there
is
substantial
and
concrete
evidence
which
proves
this
type
of
housing
is
needed
here
for
anything
beyond
students.
A
quote:
variety
of
housing
is
needed.
This
will
simply
flood
Bothell
with
micro
units.
K
What
about
the
families
and
really
anything
beyond
a
single
individual
with
the
profitability
of
these
units
and
the
Lesser
cost
to
build
with
only
a
shared
kitchen?
How
can
we
ensure
this
mix
we
so
desire?
What's
missing?
Is
not
micro,
apartments
or
even
apartments
at
all,
there's
a
massive
Apartments
currently
in
development
in
Bothell,
and
it's
unfortunate
that
we
didn't
require
some
of
these
units
to
be
affordable.
K
K
The
senior
housing
on
522
is
referenced.
A
lot
and
like
Mr
schreiger
mentioned
this
development
is
100
affordable
for
seniors.
This
senior
housing
project
has
also
proven
that
we
can
allow
code
changes
for
very
specific
outcomes
like
we
could
for
incentivizing
developing
housing.
We
could
do
this
for
incentivizing.
Developing
housing
for
individuals
with
idd
require
100
of
the
units
to
be
for
individuals
with
idd.
K
The
community
will
receive
a
real
and
desired
positive
outcome,
and
it
won't
result
in
other
developers
simply
taking
advantage
of
the
profitability
of
micro
Apartments,
which
truly
don't
benefit
the
community
in
the
agenda.
It
also
clearly
states
that
the
financing
approach
anticipated
for
this
project
is
what
is
limiting
the
percentage
of
affordable
units
requested,
so
allowing
drastic
code
changes
code
changes,
because
a
private
party
needs
to
ensure
financing
works
out,
sends
a
very
strong
message
to
the
community
and
I
urge
you
to
find
a
more
reasonable
solution.
Thank
you
for
your
time.
E
Hi,
my
name
is
Catherine
Covell
I
live
at
18524
95th
Avenue
Northeast
I
am
adjacent
to
the
Drew's
parcel
I'm,
just
north
of
it
right
now.
My
parcel
is
zoned
R
9600,
that's
all
single
family,
and
so,
if
I
wanted
to
develop,
my
parcel
I
could
only
put
single
family
residences
on
it.
That
would
be
incompatible
with
what
they're
proposing
next
door,
so
I'm
going
to
have
to
object
to
their
proposal
unless
my
lot
can
also
be
rezoned
so
that
the
uses
can
be
compatible.
Thank
you.
L
Hi,
my
name
is
rosalier
plantilia
I
live
here
in
battle
for
35
years
and
still
counting
I've
seen
battle
grow.
Okay,
I've
seen
the
street
battle
from
35
years
ago
up
to
today,
and
nothing
has
changed
from
the
street
being
wide
indoor
to
accommodate
the
traffic
which
is
now
being
used
by
huge
amount
of
vehicles
coming
in
apartments,
are
growing
up
or
sprouting
out
everywhere,
which
will
continue
to
add
more
vehicles
in
that
said
streets.
L
As
for
the
apartment
buildings,
okay,
raising
it
up
to
by
a
pipe
story
will
be
even
greater
traffic
or
vehicle
movement
in
the
area
which
will
really
create
traffic
tribe,
making
a
left
turn
on
Ross
Road
going
to
185th
in
the
morning,
and
you
cannot
use
well.
You
can
use
the
one
eight
bit
and
Main
100
foot
Avenue,
but
it
is
really
congested
in
the
morning.
L
L
G
In
past
written
statements
and
in-person
comments,
I've
explained
and
provided
you,
the
science
of
chills,
Tire
dust
preserved,
is
killing
up
to
90
of
The
Coho.
That
return
to
our
streams,
brook
trout,
rainbow,
are
also
extremely
sensitive.
The
Chinook
salmon
and
the
Kokanee
are
threatened
and
struggling
in
our
Watershed
too.
The
salmon
run
depletion
is
so
severe.
The
tassan
Orca
whales,
whose
guide
consists
of
35
Coho
or
struggling
as
an
endangered
species.
G
Also
in
past
written
statements
and
in-person
comments
have
explained
and
provided
the
science
that
inner
city
buses
shed
more
than
six
times
Tire
deaths
per
passenger
mile
per
passenger
miles
of
family
car
or
truck
inner
city
buses
are
the
largest
tire
dust
threat
per
Watershed.
Don't
depend
on
them
for
transportation,
yeah
foreign
additionally
I
brought
up
not
only
Tire
dust
in
stormwater.
Runoff
is
a
problem,
but
the
wind-borne
tire
does
it
settles
on
our
riparian
areas.
Next
to
our
streams
and
wetlands,
this
may
larger.
G
G
G
Community,
our
vision
for
Bothell,
based
on
the
above
values,
is
of
community,
which
maintains
strong
residential
neighborhoods
through
public
Investments,
intended
to
protect
neighborhoods
from
intrusion
by
incompatible
uses
demonstrates
oh
geez.
You
know
what
just
got
to
be
patient
conveys
an
overall
single-family
residential
character.
G
We
don't
have
to
do
anything.
We
don't
have
to
change
we're
not
to
do
any
amendments
until
after
December
31st
2024,
and
then
we
got
six
months
after
that
because
of
the
problem
with
the
environment.
This
pulls
in
RCW,
42c030,
40-21,
c110
and
43
76
240
I
think
these
are
all
legal
requirements
that
require
you
to
engage
with
the
Department
of
ecology,
Department
of
Commerce.
They
haven't
even
come
out
with
the
Amendments,
yet.
A
M
Yeah
I'd
like
to
speak,
I
forgot.
This
was
tonight,
I'd
come
a
couple
other
times
and
it
was
canceled.
My
name
is
Angelia
Boyce.
We
live
at
Northeast,
186th,
Street,
right
next
to
the
large
apartments
that
they're
putting
up
and
I
think
I
talked
to
one
of
the
people
when
they
first
started.
Doing
I
called
city
of
Bothell
said:
oh,
the
roof
Line's
not
going
to
be
higher
than
the
one.
That's
down
there.
M
It's
going
to
be
lower
open
up
this
retaining
wall,
but
they
don't
mention
they
put
up
these
huge
elevator
shafts
and
it
looks
like
they're
putting
like
a
picnic
area
or
something
up
on
top
of
there,
but
it's
it's
higher
than
what
they
said
it
was
going
to
be.
My
life
has
been
a
living
hell
for
the
last
four
years
as
they've
been
or
three
years,
they've
been
building
it.
M
The
noise
constantly
daily
we've
had
huge
the
workers.
You
know
you
can
listen
to
music,
but
blaring
music
and
rude
vulgar,
comedy
shows
and
my
trees
have
been
ruined
in
the
back.
They
almost
cut
down
a
cherry
tree.
We
saved
it
where
the
fence
went
up
which
they
removed
without
telling
any
of
the
neighbors
they
were
going
to
remove
the
fence
the
retaining
wall.
It's
since
they've
been
pounding,
we've
had
plumbing
problems.
M
Our
house
has
shifted
a
little
bit,
there's
a
crack
forming
in
the
ceiling,
even
though
the
retaining
wall
some
neighbors,
went
with
the
the
nail,
spikes
and
others
didn't
it's
been
awful.
It's
been
horrible,
I
feel
sorry
for
anybody
who
puts
up
any
of
this
next
to
their
home.
My
husband's
lived
there
since
the
50s
I've
lived
there
for
30
years,
but
it's
it's
been
a
horrible
thing.
You
know
bothell's
not
for
a
day
or
lifetime
anymore,
we're
probably
going
to
look
for
someplace
else
to
live.
M
It's
not
the
same
I
work
out
in
my
backyard
I'm
working
in
a
fishbowl,
oh
yeah,
and
they
also
have
decks
now
that
face
our
yard,
so
people
can
just
stare
at
us
all
day.
It's
it's
really
a
sad
turn
of
events,
so
I
feel
sorry
for
anybody
who
has
one
of
these
places
built
next
to
them
the
Harbor
homes
they
they
didn't.
Listen
to
our
concerns.
No
privacy
trees
ever
came
as
promised.
It's
it's
been
a
horrible
horrible
experience.
I'm,
that's
my
comment.
Please
don't
allow
people
to
do
this.
It's
ruined
our
home
thanks.
N
So,
first
of
all,
thank
you,
Commissioners
and
thank
you
Bothell
residents
for
taking
your
time
to
come
and
voice
your
your
thoughts
and
your
concerns
just
to
give
a
little
bit
of
background
on
Connie
and
I.
So
we
are
over
20-year
residents
of
Bothell,
so
we've
been
a
part
of
this
community
for
a
very
long
time.
N
We
are
not
developers.
We
came
to
this
particular
position
because
we
have
an
idd
daughter
and
in
looking
around
for
solutions
for
her,
we
couldn't
find
any
good
Solutions,
and
so
what
started
as
a
to
look
for
a
solution
for
her
and
a
few
others
has
actually
become
a
bigger
project
because
of
the
availability
of
additional
property.
Next
to
the
lot
that
we
initially
purchased.
N
N
There
were
28
units
per
year,
developed
for
idd
housing
and
so
there's
there's
clearly
a
shortage
and
that
the
shortage
we
can
talk
about
Washington
State
and
yes,
that's
that's
local,
but
in
Bothell
we
are
part
of
a
idd
community,
and
so
many
people
that
we
know
are
trying
to
solve
the
exact
same
issue.
So
so
this
is
for
the
community,
it
is
for
the
community
of
Bothell
and
it
is
a
beneficial
project
to
the
community.
N
There
was
a
comment
made
about
the
the
cost
of
compact
housing
or
micro
Apartments.
There
was
a
comment
made
from
a
developer
that
really
stuck
with
me,
and
what
the
developer
said
is.
Is
that
a
lot
of
the
people
that
are
looking
for
housing?
They
do
not
care
about
the
parking
amenities,
The
Workout
Club.
N
They
don't
care
about
a
whole
lot
of
things.
What
they
need
is
they
need
something
that
has
a
price
point
that
they
can
on
their
income
meet,
and
so
it
is
important
to
have
this
type
of
housing
that
is
on
the
more
affordable
Spectrum.
If
you
look
at
the
the
apartments
that
have
been
going
into
Bothell,
most
of
them
are
in
the
twenty
five
hundred
dollar
range
per
month,
and
that,
for
a
lot
of
folks
is
not
is,
is
not
in
their
budget.
A
O
I'm
Connie,
Drews
and
I
just
want
to
continue
on
what
he
was
saying
is
about
the
need
for
this
type
of
housing
in
Bothell.
You
know,
I
have
a
lot
of
compassion
for
single-family
homeowners.
We
are
a
single
family
homeowner
here
in
Bothell,
so
I
understand.
We
get
that,
however,
there's
a
cost
to
change
and
the
single-family
homeowners.
O
You
know
it's
hard,
I
get
it.
You
know,
but
we're
looking
at
our
particular
property-
and
it
makes
sense-
and
unlike
a
lot
of
what
we're
talking
about
with
the
downtown
transition
zone,
is
that
this
property,
it's
only
accessible
from
downtown,
so
to
put
a
family.
You
know
to
put
it
in
with
the
single-family
housing
up
above
we're
entering
from
downtown,
so
it
to
me
that
makes
it
very
different
than
any
of
the
other
properties
that
some
of
them
that
we're
talking
about
there
is
no
access
from
the
single
family
property.
O
So
that's
one
thing
and
then
the
other
thing
that
was
mentioned
about
the
micro
Apartments.
Originally
we
had
seen
an
example
of
housing
that
didn't
have
like
kitchens
in
it
we
are
looking
at.
It
will
be
a
full
complete
unit,
we'll
have
a
full
kitchen
and
a
bedroom
it'll
be
a
complete
Studio,
because
that's
what
we
found
makes
sense.
So
just
I
just
wanted
to
bring
that
correction
as
well.
So
we
really
believe
that
there's
a
need
there
and
also
the
other
comment-
was
about
100
idd.
O
Well,
that's
not
ideal,
because
that's
basically
institutional
I
do
not
want
to
put
my
daughter
or
nobody
would
want
to
put
those
in.
It's
like
me
saying:
okay,
you
you
with
brown,
hair
and
brown
eyes.
You're
gonna
go
live
with
everybody
else
who
has
brown,
hair
and
brown
eyes?
It's
not
okay.
So
we
want
to
provide
a
place
where
it's
inclusive,
where
everyone's
welcome.
We
really
want
to
build
community,
and
we
really
think
this
project
is
going
to
be
a
huge,
huge,
huge
asset
to
Bothell.
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
I
I
just
want
to
reiterate
that
part
because
I
know
I
asked
questions
about
it
before
senior
planner
boy,
just
to
confirm.
First,
for
people
who
are
concerned
about
the
the
five
floors
just
want
to
be
clear.
There
would
have
to
be
at
least
about
a
19
foot
difference
between
the
average
grade
of
the
proposed
structure
and
the
average
grade
of
an
existing
residential
home
for
them
to
even
employ
this
option.
It
sounds
like,
in
addition
to
pledging
50
affordable
so,
for
example,
186
up
here,
which
is
almost
flat.
I
I
Right
point,
being
it's
the
only
place,
that's
going
to
happen
is
where
there's
a
significant
slope
right
now
in
all
of
the
Tahoe
area.
It's
really
just
West,
Hill
slope
I
can
think
of
you're
not
going
to
really
see
it
appear
much
so
anyway.
I
just
want
to
be
clear
about
that,
because
I
know
that
there
were
some
people
comments
about
that
tonight
and
I
just
wanted
to
make
sure
we
understood
that
completely.
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
C
C
If,
if
they
decided
not
to
do
affordable
units,
they
wouldn't
be
able
to
use
the
the
voluntary
incentive.
So
they'd
be
limited
to
three
stories
in
that
case,
so
the
the
the
idea
is
that
the
code
doesn't
specify
a
certain
type
of
development.
It
provides
opportunity
to
do
a
range
of
developments
and
then
certain
safeguards
for,
for
those
the
impacts
of
those.
J
Yes,
thank
you.
That's
that's
exactly
what
I
thought
and
so
my
question
I'm
going
to
turn
my
question
the
other
way,
then,
what's
what's
the?
What
is
the
rationale
for
us
providing
this
voluntary
incentive
change
to
the
code
separate
from
the
Drew's
property?
What
is
the
primary
reason
for
doing
this.
C
C
C
So
that's
yeah,
the
the
they
will
for
the
affordable
units.
They
will
have
a
contract
that
Arch
will
manage
and-
and
we
we've
had
discussions
with
Arch
about
expanding
that
to
include
other
requirements
of
the
development
like
the
like
the
parking
requirement
and
and
the
percentage
of
special
needs
housing
that
can
also
be
included.
J
The
the
concern
I
have
is
with
the
weather
findings
are
written.
Is
that
what
senior
planner
Boyd
described
in
terms
of
the
rationale
for
the
voluntary
incentives
can
stand
on
its
own
or
should
stand
on
its
own
without
reference
to
the
Jew
proposal
and
so
I'm
concerned
that
the
language
is
mixing
it
up
to
suggest
that
this
is
really
because
of
the
Jews
proportional,
which
it
isn't
right
and
I'm
concerned
that
they're
getting
mixed
up
to
me.
What
is
being
proposed
today
are
actually
two
really
different
things.
J
One
is
to
extend
the
downtown
transitional
Zone
to
this
additional
property
and
to
change
the
code
to
provide
for
voluntary
incentives
across
a
particular
zoned
area
within
the
city
and
to
me
they
don't
necessarily
have
to
connect
and
I
find
the
I
to
me.
The
way
it's
written
suggests
that
they
are
connected.
J
I
I
concur
with
commissioner
Jones
I.
Think
it's
fine
because
it
stands
on
its
own
and
I.
Don't
I,
don't
I,
don't
want
to
stop
it
because
I
think
it's
a
good
proposal.
It's
a
good
addition
to
our
to
our
code,
but
yeah.
We
can
scrub
out
the
Drews
and
just
make
sure
it
can.
It
can
happen
and
that
anyone
could
take
advantage
of
this.
I
This
is
going
to
be
such
a
narrow
needle
to
thread
for
most
developers
just
to
remind
people.
The
transit
oriented
development
bill
that
died
in
the
legislature.
This
year
was
killed
in
part
because
they
asked
for
20
inclusionary
zoning.
That's
enough
for
to
make
most
projects
not
pencil
out
50
I.
Actually,
honestly,
as
someone
who
works
on
development,
sometimes
don't
know
how
you
get
that
to
pencil
out
without
subsidy.
So
you
know
more
power
to
you.
I
That's
great
I
love
it
most
developers
can
hardly
make
10
or
20
work
so
anyway,
this
could
stand
on
its
own
without
that
it's
going
to
be
a
really
high
and
difficult
challenge
for
majority
of
developers.
Who
aren't
going
to
take
advantage
of
this
also
limited
by
the
fact
that
there's
only
going
to
be
a
handful
properties
in
Buffalo?
I
C
A
I
mean
it
is
a
bit
out
of
order,
but
I'll
address
at
least
the
concern
partially
that
this
agenda
and
these
draft
findings
are
part
of
the
record,
so
they
they
exist.
Independent
of
the
changes
that
are
made.
The
changes
will
be
part
of
the
final
document,
but
the
agenda
and
the
findings,
conclusions
and
recommendations,
as
previously
submitted,
are
there
and
live
forever
on
the
internet.
J
I
suggested
change
here,
I'm
wondering
if
the
word
special
needs
really
apply
there
as
well.
If
the
Jews
proposal
is
taken
out,
is
this
an
attempt
to
provide
opportunities
for
more
some
involuntary
incentives
for
affordable
housing,
or
is
it
to
also
do
that
for
special
needs,
and
this
would
be
a
number
eight.
C
A
F
Incorporate
both
the
special
needs
information,
the
reason
why
the
parking
requirements
are
going
to
be
what
they
are
going
to
be,
and
also
refer
to
the
Drew's
proposal.
Almost
as
a
historical
note
provide,
this
proposal
was
made.
I
really
agree
with
commissioner
Jones
principle
that
these
are
general
principles
that
should
apply
throughout
and
I
also
think.
It's
a
good
idea
to.
F
A
A
P
I
I
definitely
appreciate
the
on
the
Fly
wordsmithing
I'm,
not
so
sure
that
it
gets
us
where,
where
we
want
to
be
because
we
talk
about
the
proposed
special
needs
housing,
but
we
don't
tie
it
to
the
druze
they're
still
out
of
it
and
the
proposed
The
Proposal
sort
of
comes
out
of
nowhere
in
the
comments
since
we've
removed
the
Drews
from
number
eight.
So
maybe
we
need
a
few
more
words
in
there
or
another
sentence,
I'm,
not
sure,
but
it
it
feels
a
little
bit
disjointed
to
just
start
talking
about
special
needs.
B
Could
I
make
a
friendly
suggestion?
Sorry
I'm
over
here
today,
I
I'm
wondering
if
maybe
we
could
just
have
a
finding
that
that
stated
that
this
application
was
initiated
by
the
Drews
and
then
these
could
be
following
findings.
So
that
way
it
kind
of
memorializes
where
they
came
from
and
then
the
different
things
that
came
out
of
that.
J
C
C
A
A
A
C
A
A
A
And
third,
the
code
amendments
are
in
the
best
interests
of
public
health
safety
and
Welfare,
see
General
nodding
in
agreement
on
that
So.
Based
on
these
findings
and
conclusions,
the
Planning
Commission
recommends
the
city
council
adopt
the
code
amendments
in
exhibit
a
to
these
findings,
conclusions
and
recommendations.
A
A
F
The
ish
one
issue
I
would
like
to
speak
about
is
whether
or
not
certain
units
should
be
considered,
affordable
or
desirable.
Based
on
the
rent
per
square
foot
and
I
appreciate
folks
doing
the
calculations,
I
would
argue
there
is
a
premium
on
having
one's
own
unit.
That
is
private
in
which
they
can
be
independent
and
from
which
there
is
walking
distance
to
the
amenities
that
are
needed.
F
I
believe
that
I
myself
would
pay
more
for
a
smaller
unit
in
an
amenity-rich
Community
been
a
space
in
somebody
else's
house,
far
away
and
there's
a
premium
there,
and
it
is
a
premium
that
is
very
much
described
and
desired
by
the
families,
with
a
people
with
in
the
idd
community
and
I
encourage
other
planning
Commissioners
to
speak
to
this,
in
hopes
that
perhaps
some
of
the
folks
who
have
been
involved
in
this
process
might
hear
their
concerns
heard.
Thank
you.
Q
Questionnaire
occurred,
thank
you.
This
is
Karsten.
I
would
also
thank
you
for
bringing
this
up.
Commissioner
Gustafson
I'd
also
say
that
yeah
this
has
been
a
long
public
process
and
I
appreciate
everyone's
sticking
with
it
for
so
long.
It's
since
the
initial
public
hearings
and
the
the
noticing
to
so
many
people
that
was
a
pretty
expensive
process
and
so
I
recognize
that
that
was
real.
Q
That
was
a
real
big
lift
for
the
applicants
and
also
for
the
community
to
stay
involved
and
stay
up
to
date
on
all
the
issues
and
and
keep
coming
back
to
learn
more
I
want
to
say
specifically
associated
with
something
that
commissioner
westerbeck
brought
up
this
evening.
Is
that
these
code
amendments
we
can't
spot
Zone
places,
we
can't
say,
pull
a
single
lot
out
of
the
city
and
say
this
is
what
we
want
to
do
here.
This
is
what
we
want
to
do
here.
Q
We
want
the
city,
it's
not
a
it's,
not
a
Lego
City.
We
can't
build
the
exact
way
we
want
right.
We
have
to
say
these
are
the
values
that
we
have.
These
are
the
compatible
uses.
These
are
the
incompatible
uses
and
then
we
go
from
there
and
so
I
really
appreciate
that
people
have
given
us
their
feedback
on
their
values
rather
than
just
specifically
saying
this
is
what
I
don't
like
about
it.
This
is
what
I
don't
like
about
the
specific
unit
instead
saying
I
care
about.
Q
J
A
So
a
comment
was
made
about
walking
the
properties
and
I
have
walked
this
property
more
than
once.
I
know
many
I
won't
speak
for
everyone,
but
I
know
many
of
the
Commissioners
have
walked
the
property
and
to
get
a
feel
for
the
neighborhood
we
take
our
response
and
I
will
speak
for
all
the
Commissioners
on
this.
We
take
our
responsibility
seriously
and
we
we
do
try
to
look
on
the
ground.
What
the
impacts
will
be
beyond
the
paper
that
we
push,
so
it
has
been
a
long
process.
A
I
Add
a
few
more
comments:
I
I
agree:
I,
I,
love
that
people
are
passionate
about
this
I
used
to
be
the
one
who
would
come
and
make
comments
at
Planning,
Commission
and
So
eventually
applied,
and
now
here
I
am
so
we
we
care,
we
nerd
out
on
this
stuff.
We
care
about
it.
A
lot
we're
here,
because
we're
we're
trying
to
create
Community
for
everyone
and
I
have
mentioned
before.
I
have
an
idd
daughter
as
well,
but
beside
that
I
want
Bothell
to
be
the
kind
of
place
where
they're
welcome.
I
37
000
units
are
needed
in
Washington
state.
We
I
feel
like
this
came
to
us
and
I
thought.
Well,
this
is
fantastic.
Someone
wants
to
do
this
in
Bothell.
Look
at
this
enormous
need
and
we
have
the
Drews
who
again
I
do
development
math
all
the
time.
This
is
a
challenging
one.
To
make
pencil
out
to
generously
offer
50
is,
is
a
is
a
gift
to
Bothell
it's
a
gift.
It's
huge!
This
is
going
to
be
a
real,
a
bright
spot
in
our
community
and
I
live
also
within
the
the
mailer
area.
Downtown.
I
I
I
I
tend
to
think
that
it
won't
be
probably
as
impactful
for
a
lot
of
people
as
as
they
think,
and
you
know,
since
you
know
five
six
thousand
years
now
as
long
as
humans
have
created
cities
and
places
they
change,
they
grow
they
adapt.
They
make
room
for
new
people
and
different
different
kinds
of
communities.
We
hope
and
it's
inevitable.
I
So
this
is
just
a
Bothell
again
changing
and
adapting
to
to
the
times
it's
not
going
to
be
1985
Bothell
forever,
and
we
need
to
make
room
for
our
kids
and
people
with
with
other
needs.
Besides
those
like
ours
and
I,
think
it's
wonderful
that
this
says.
I
also
want
to
remind
everyone,
like
one
of
the
reasons,
we're
seeing
a
increased
homeless
challenges
throughout
the
United
States.
We
don't
allow
a
lot
of
like
transitional
housing
like
we
did
50
and
100
years
ago,
seeing
lock
what
is
it,
what
they
call
them?
I
I
So,
as
far
as
that
goes,
they
do
feel
a
need.
People
would
much
rather
have
that
than
be
without
home
entirely.
So
it
I
think
it's
presumptuous
of
us
to
pretend
that
everybody
needs
what
we
think
we
need
to
be
happy
and
to
live.
Our
our
requirements
are
very
different
than
someone
else's
and
I
when
I
was
a
young
person
lived
in
a
unit
that
was
less
than
150
square
feet
and
on
Capitol
Hill
for
two
years,
and
it
was
inexpensive
and
I
loved
it.
I
It
was
great,
fantastic
I
had
to
go
down
the
hall
to
go
to
the
bathroom
and
I
didn't
feel
it
was
a
hardship
at
all.
So
we
we
need
to
bring
that
back.
We
need
to
make
it
legal
again
so
anyway,
just
a
few
comments,
I'm
glad
that
we're
becoming
the
kind
of
community
that
is
opening
its
mind
and
to
these
these
ideas
and
making
room
for
people
who
also
want
to
be
part
of
Bothell.
Thank
you,
foreign.
A
A
Turn
up
my
mind,
we
had
a
unanimous
vote
supporting
these
I'd
like
to
thank
senior
planner
Boyd,
not
just
for
bearing
with
us
this
evening,
while
we
forced
him
to
draft
on
the
fly,
but
also
for
all
the
work
that
went
into
this.
It's
been
a
long
process.
I
I
think
it
has
been
responsive
not
to
everything
that's
been
raised,
but
to
to
many
of
the
concerns
there
have
been
changes
made
based
on
what
we
heard
and
thank
you
for
for
doing
that
and
helping
us
through
this
process.
A
A
B
So
I
received
a
couple
of
questions
from
planning
Commissioners
on
the
middle
housing,
ordinance
for
the
comprehensive
plan
and
code
amendments,
and
so
I
thought
what
would
be
best
to
go
off
of.
Is
this
document
we
provided
to
city
council
I
believe
June
13th.
My
dates
are
all
getting
fuzzy
sometime
in
June.
This
was
provided
to
them
and
essentially
what
we
did
is
compared.
B
What
the
planning
commission's
recommendation
was
to
HB
1110
and
made
recommendations
to
City
Council
on
how
to
move
forward
with
the
ordinance,
because
when
we
started
this
HB
1110
was
like
a
twinkle
in
folks
eyes,
and
then
it
got
adopted
before
this
got
adopted
by
city
council,
and
so
we
had
an
interesting
exercise
in
figuring
out.
What
do
we
do
with
a
Planning
Commission
recommendation?
B
And
then
what
do
we
do
with
new
state
regulations,
essentially
mandating
that
we
adopt
some
level
of
of
middle
housing,
and
so
some
of
the
questions
that
were
sent
our
way
focused
on
one
of
the
Planning
Commission
recommendations
was
that
all
all
existing
lots
have
be
allowed
to
have
four
units
on
them.
So
one
of
the
things
that
we're
waiting
on
right
now
from
the
Department
of
Commerce
is
guidance
on
what
HB
1110
like
the
in
the
application
and
intent
of
each
section
and
so
we're
in
an
interesting
spot
of
writing
code.
B
Without
that
guidance,
and
so
one
of
the
things
we
tried
to
do
is
is
kind
of
take
a
strict
read
of
HB
1110
and
and
put
that
into
a
proposed
ordinance.
And
so
that's
where
a
lot
of
the
changes
came
from
between
the
Planning
Commission
recommendation
and
HB
1110.
We
tried
to
leave
as
much
in
as
possible
from
Planning
Commission,
but
anywhere
where
we
felt
that
it
was
not
in
compliance
with
HB
1110
or
we
didn't
think
it
would
pass
muster
of
alternative
compliance.
B
B
B
And
so
one
of
the
things
that
we
suggested
to
council
is
if
they
do
want
to
move
forward
with
an
affordability
requirement
that
may
need
to
become
later
so
that
we
have
more
time
to
do
analysis
based
on
the
requirements
of
HB
1110
versus
the
requirements
of
or
the
suggestion
or
recommendation
of,
Planning
Commission.
So
this
document
I'm
hoping
provides
a
little
bit
of
background
on
on
why
some
of
those
changes
were
suggested
at
the
July
11th
hearing
before
I
jump
to
what
the
next
steps
are.
I
said
a
lot.
F
B
So
that's
something
too
we're
hoping
additional
guidance
gives
us
some
parameters
of
like
where
how
we
could
apply
affordability
differently
than
HB
1110.
If
you
just
don't
have
that
guidance
right
now,
and
so
you
know
we
do
want
to
look
into
this
further,
but
want
to
make
sure
that
whatever
we
put
in
our
code
meets
alternative
compliance
per
the
Department
of
Commerce,
because
we'd
need
to
put
something
in
the
code
that
then
doesn't
pass,
and
then
we
have
to
do
more
research.
B
So
there's
there's
a
little
bit
of
weight
on
that
and
it's
just
I
mean
we're
further
than
other
cities
that
we
have
something.
But
then
we
also
are
in
this
spot
of.
We
have
something,
but
we
also
have
new
requirements,
and
so
now
we
have
to
mix
the
two
together,
and
so
it's
definitely
on
our
radar
and
something
that
we'll
be
looking
into,
especially
as
we
start
looking
at
updating
our
housing
strategy
and
and
needing
to
comply
with
HB
1220,
which
passed
last
year.
I
Commissioner
West
come
back
Mr
Rick
here.
This
is
more
of
a
just
commentary,
but
I
I,
never
I,
of
course
voiced
this
in
meetings
in
the
past,
I
always
thought
our
dead
City
bonus
for
new
Platz
for
missing
metal
for
our
middle
housing
was
always
too
complicated
and
not
necessary.
I
think
it's
I'm
hoping
the
state
prevails
here
and
that
all
existing
and
New
Lots
new
plats
Etc.
It's
just
four
units
allowed
period.
Just
keep
it
simple,
straightforward.
You
gotta,
you
got
a
lot
residential
lots.
I
I
was
thrilled
to
see
that
I
call
it
the
Reese's
Peanut
Butter
Cup,
because
we
get
the
best
of
both
because
I
I
think
our
Don
I
mean
I
helped
shape
this
actually
I
I,
like
I,
said
I,
never
I,
never
liked
it,
because
I
think
it's
too
complicated
I
mean
I,
understand
you
put
two
percentages
and
stuff,
but
you
end
up
with
this.
This
neighborhood.
I
That's
a
mix
of
one
two,
three
four
and
we're
doing
it
for
people
who
don't
want
the
city
to
grow,
and
you
know:
we've
got
million
dollar
houses
in
Bothell,
so
I
just
feel
like.
Let's,
let's
get
to
it,
let's
do
things
actually
matter
and-
and
this
would
make
more
of
an
impact-
and
honestly
four
before
unit
doesn't
pencil
out
very
much
very
well
in
Bothell
anymore,
given
the
cost
of
land,
and
so
it's
not
going
to
make
much
of
a
difference
anyway.
So
might
as
well
just
make
it
easy.
B
So
I
wanted
to
make
sure
you
all
had
a
chance
to
see
that,
and
it
does
address
a
little
bit
of
you
know
some
some
studies
that
were
done
by
our
consultant
to
figure
out
what
percentage
of
lots
could
potentially
yeah,
be
both
feasible
and
and
meet
the
requirements
and
I.
Don't
remember
the
numbers
off
the
top
of
my
head,
but
it
is,
it
is
a
pretty
small
number,
and
so
it
is.
I
I
think
and
I
read
it
all.
If
you
haven't
read
it
already,
maybe
already
has
the
Dei
report
feasibility
study
all
that
it's
absolutely
fantastic.
We
got
really
good
work
from
them
and
I
appreciate
it
enormously.
I
wish
everyone
in
Bothell
would
read
those
reports
I
think
it's
really
important
information.
I'm,
probably
appreciating
the
choir
here,
but
they're
really
good.
B
So
then,
the
second
question
that
was
brought
to
us
by
commissioner
westerbeck
was
no
action
was
taken
last
night,
and
so
the
reason
why
or
one
of
the
considerations
is
why
no
action
is
taken
is
that
we
need
to
make
comprehensive
plan
amendments
to
make
code
amendments
and
the
growth
management
act
allows
us
to
update
our
comprehensive
plan
once
a
year.
So
all
of
our
private
comprehensive
plan,
amendments
and
City
initiated
comprehensive
plan
amendments
all
have
to
be
considered
in
unison.
It
doesn't
mean
that
Council
has
to
approve
all
of
them.
B
They
can
say
we're
going
to
approve
this
one
and
not
this
one,
but
the
intent
of
that
is
that
we
look
at
our
comprehensive
plan
and
the
changes
cumulatively.
So
we
essentially
know
the
right
hand
knows
what
the
left
hand
is
doing
and
we've
thought
about
all
of
those
changes
together,
and
so
you
all
heard
the
other
comprehensive
plan
Amendment
tonight,
which
does
then
move
that
recommendation
forward
to
city
council,
and
so
there
can
be
consideration
of
of
both
comprehensive
plan
amendments.
B
F
F
My
first
thought
is:
if
we
can
only
update
if
City
of
Buffalo
can
only
update
the
comprehensive
plan
once
a
year,
what
happens
if
the
Department
of
Commerce
guidelines
are
not
available
by
the
time
the
comprehensive
plan
amendments
go
to
council?
Does
that
mean
that
the
four
Plex
ibility
might
not
happen
until
next
year?
So.
B
Code
amendments
can
be
taken
at
any
time,
so
we're
continuing
conversations
with
Council
in
the
fall.
We
haven't
received
direction
from
them
on
how
they
want
to
consider
both.
So
they
could
decide
to
move
forward
without
guidance.
They
could
decide
to
move
forward
with
the
comp
plan
amendments
and
hold
code
amendments.
We
don't
have
that
exact
Direction
at
this
point
in
time,
but
essentially
the
comprehensive
plan,
amendments
that
are
required
to
adopt
middle
housing.
B
As
far
as
we
can
tell
from
our
legal
read
of
it
and
our
or
what
we've
done
so
far.
Is
that
those
don't
we
don't
need
any
Department
of
Commerce
guidance
to
adopt
the
comprehensive
plan
amendments,
but
the
code
amendments
may
benefit
from
that,
but
we're
continuing
that
conversation
with
Council
of
how
they'd
like
to
move
forward.
F
Basic
question:
the
code
amendments:
can
they
be
if,
if
we
put
forward
or
if
the
city
puts
forward
a
principle
in
the
comprehensive
plan,
amendments,
does
that
then
open
the
door
for
whenever,
in
the
next
year
a
four
Plex
Amendment
might
come
up
that
the
city
can
just
pass
it
whenever
it
comes
to
the
table.
Yeah.
B
So
if
we
propose,
whenever
we
propose
amendments
to
our
our
zoning
code,
it's
supposed
to
be
in
compliance
with
our
comprehensive
plan,
and
so
if
our
comprehensive
plan
were
amended,
but
the
zoning
code
were
not
was
not
amended,
it
would
at
least
make
sure
that
that's
that
step
has
been
taken.
So
essentially
we
we
should
be
making
sure
that
all
of
our
code
amendments
comply
with
the
comprehensive
plan,
and
if
the
comprehensive
plan
has
been
updated
to
support
future
code
amendments,
then
that
would
not
be
an
obstacle
to
that
code.
Adoption.
F
R
F
Anyone
else
my
suggestion
would
be
that
perhaps
we
as
a
Planning
Commission
point
out
that
this
is
missing
right
now,
due
to
circumstances
beyond
the
control
of
staff
and
Planning
Commission
I
mean
we
could
do
it
without
the
guidance
but
I
don't
think
that
would
go
through
and
that
we
really
want
to
keep
people
focused
on
the
fact
that,
sometime
in
the
future
within
the
next
year,
we
would
like
to
revisit
the
floor.
Fourplex
flexibility,
that's
just
what
comes
first
to
my
mind,
but
any
other
items
that
we
think
should
be
passed
with
urgency.
A
B
A
Okay
but
again
the
commission
will
have
the
opportunity
to
review
the
work
plan
and
make
a
recommendation
whether
or
not
there
is
capacity
to
act
on
that.
It's
a
separate
question,
but
we
will
have
the
opportunity
to
speak
to
what
we
believe
is
important
and
should
be
included,
and
then
the
process
will
go
where
it
may
correct.
Yeah.
B
We
have
an
activity
right
now,
I
believe,
commissioner
Jones
inspired
it
it's
what
makes
Bothell
special
so
we're
talking
about
the
vision.
You
asked
what
you
know,
how
is
the
vision
unique
to
Bothell
and
that
got
us
thinking
about
how
we
could
ask
our
community
to
tell
us
what
they
think
makes
it
unique
and
then,
at
summer
nights
this
Friday
and
next
Friday
we
will
be
tabling
a
booth
to
talk
to
folks.
B
So,
if
you
see
us
say
hi
tell
your
friends
to
come,
say
hi
to
us
and
we'll
be
talking
to
people
about
the
comprehensive
plan
and
some
of
our
visioning
exercises
other
than
that.
No
major
updates
from
us
just
encourage
you
all
to
check
out,
engage
Bothell
and
share
it
with
all
your
friends
and
family
and
everyone.
A
Seeing
none
and
I
don't
believe
we
have
anything
particular
to
report
to
council
either
unless
anyone
says
otherwise
all
right.
So
this
is
our
meeting
before
the
August
break.
We
will
not
be
meeting
again
until
September
6th,
most
of
us,
so
with
that
there
being
no
further
business.
Is
there
a
motion
to
adjourn.