►
From YouTube: Bothell Planning Commission Meeting - September 21, 2022
Description
0:03:30 - Public Comments
0:04:20 - Approval of Minutes
0:05:25 - Public Hearing: Bike Plan
0:34:50 - Public Hearing: Parking Reductions Near Frequent Transit Public Hearing
1:40:40 - Unfinished Business
1:41:00 - Reports from Members
A
A
A
Tonight's
meeting
is
hybrid,
the
city
is
providing
the
option
to
attend
either
in
person
or
remotely
via
Zoom
for
those
on
Zoom.
The
chat
and
question
functions
are
not
enabled
so
that
we're
compliant
with
the
open
public
meetings.
Act
we'll
have
space
for
public
comment
at
the
beginning
of
the
meeting
for
comments
on
issues
not
on
tonight's
agenda.
Please
limit
these
comments
to
three
minutes.
Public
comment
and
hearing
testimony
will
be
allowed
both
in
person
and
Via
Zoom
commenters
were
asked
to
submit
an
online
form
by
3
pm.
Today,
emails
were
encouraged
as
well.
A
Attendees
may
also
make
comments
and
have
been
asked
to
indicate
their
desire
to
comment
on
the
sign
in
sheets,
the
Imagine,
Bothell
notice,
City's
website
and
tonight's
agenda.
All
provided
information
to
the
public
for
providing
comments.
The
video
this
meeting
will
be
streamed,
live
as
well
as
recorded
for
available
and
available
for
later
viewing
on
the
city's
YouTube
channel.
A
There's
a
call-in
number
on
the
meeting
agenda
for
members
of
the
public
who
wish
to
call
in
by
phone
to
listen,
live
to
tonight's
meeting
for
those
phone
in
callers
staff
are
going
to
make
every
effort
to
specify
which
materials
they're
referencing
during
presentations.
So
everyone
can
follow
along
at
this
point,
we'll
take
a
moment
to
acknowledge
the
attendance
of
the
Commissioners
tonight.
Chair
Kiernan
is
absent
and
excused
commissioner
Dodd.
B
B
C
A
Lastly,
before
we
begin
I'd
like
to
reiterate
some
meeting
guidelines
for
everyone,
please
speak
clearly
and
pause,
frequently
state
your
name
each
time
before
speaking,
mute
your
microphone
when
not
speaking
and
if
you're
streaming
the
live,
video
feed.
Please
turn
off
that
sound
as
there
is
a
delay
Commissioners
at
specific
breaks
in
the
presentation
I'm
going
to
be
calling
on
members
who
wish
to
speak
or
ask
a
question
if
you
want
to
speak,
raise
your
hand
or
indicate
with
the
microphone
I'll
call
you
when
I
see
it.
A
Is
there
any
comment
on
that
or
questions
sounds
like
we're
good
with
that.
So
the
first
item
on
the
agenda
tonight
is
public
comment.
The
city
has
accepted
visitor
comment
and
writing
as
well
as
a
sign
up
sheet
for
those
who
wish
to
speak
at
tonight's
meeting.
Written
comments
submitted
to
staff
no
later
than
3
pm
today,
we're
forwarded
to
all
the
Commissioners
and
are
part
of
the
record.
This
time
is
for
items
not
on
the
agenda.
A
A
A
F
Okay,
just
getting
the
slides
ready
here
all
right
well
good
evening,
Commissioners
again,
my
name
is
Sherman
gong
city
transportation.
Planner
with
me
tonight
is
Steve
murakawa,
the
capital
division
manager,
and
tonight
this
will
be
a
short
discussion
as
we
need
time
to
finish
the
bike
plan
to
its
final
form.
Based
on
the
previous
comments
expressed
during
the
study
sessions,
we
would
like
to
have
that
ready
for
you
before
you
make
a
recommendation
to
city
council
for
approval.
F
So
tonight
we
will
discuss
the
tax
revisions
we
proposed
for
the
bike
section
of
the
comprehensive
plan
to
reference
the
new
bike
plan.
We
also
want
to
discuss
your
inquiries
from
the
last
meeting
in
regards
to
various
topics,
including
prioritization
of
school
bike
routes,
additional
safety
and
connectivity
projects,
design,
standard
modifications
and
a
review
of
the
staff
Dei
related
actions
for
the
bike
plan.
F
F
A
F
F
F
A
F
We
go
there.
We
go
okay,
so
continuing
Sherman
gong.
Here
again,
the
proposed
bike
plan
needs
to
be
adopted
into
the
city's
comprehensive
plan
to
become
the
official
document
of
reference
comprehensive
bike.
The
comprehensive
plan
bike
section
should
reflect
the
new
vision
of
the
city
bike.
Network
staff
proposes
to
amend
the
current
comprehensive
plan
to
add
the
language
shown
here
with
some
edits
to
the
existing
texts
that
are
no
longer
relevant
to
the
new
plan.
F
F
This
project
list
is
a
high
level
review
of
the
priority.
The
project
priority
to
give
us
an
idea
of
where
these
projects
rank.
However,
staff
will
be
likely
analyzing
how
some
projects
could
be
strategically
segmented,
to
account
for
more
detailed
factors
which
could
then
revise
the
the
rankings
we
have,
regardless
of
the
results,
other
factors
May
determine
which
projects
could
be
implemented
sooner,
such
as
cost
or
construction
opportunities.
F
F
F
However,
they
also
showed
conceptually
the
intersection
curb
and
curb
ramps
without
much
detail.
As
you
see
in
the
attached
photo
there,
these
drawings
could
be
misleading
to
what
staff
is
actually
acquiring
for
those
sections
of
the
facility,
so
the
details
will
be
modified
to
only
show
the
mid-block
segments
intersection.
Treatments
are
specified
in
the
design
standards
to
follow.
Nacto
nationally
accepted
guidelines
at
this
time,
and
we'll
continue
to
do
that.
Further
detail
for
intersection
approaches
and
transition
points
from
new
facilities
to
existing
facilities,
for
example,
will
be
developed
and
could
be
adopted
Citywide.
F
F
We
also
developed
the
prioritization
criteria
methodology
with
a
consideration
given
towards
the
diversity,
equity
and
inclusion
elements,
as
we
described
previously,
and
we
utilize
the
Dei
consultant
checklist
to
work
through
a
review
of
our
efforts
to
equitably,
treat
and
include
our
marginalized
Community
groups,
which
they
concluded.
We
did
foreign.
F
So
our
next
steps
will
be
to
finalize
the
bike
plan
revisions.
We
have
been
discussing
to
prepare
a
sepa
checklist
for
publication
and
review
and
then
we
would
like
to
continue
this
public
hearing
to
the
October
19th
meeting.
As
we
mentioned
earlier,
to
get
approval
from
for
city
council
recommendation
and
that's
all
we
have
great.
C
A
D
C
G
So
right
now,
what
we're
doing
Citywide
is
trying
to
get
consistent
across
the
Department's
methodology
and
it
takes
time
and
effort
and
we
have
a
halftime
person
that
is
being
called
upon
for
everything
at
this
point,
while
they're
trying
to
develop
this,
so
what
we
did
was
we
did
get
a
checklist.
This
is
not
filled
out.
No
okay,
you
have
the
other
one
somewhere
else.
You
don't
know
yeah
I
hang
on.
Let
me
try
to
share
this.
G
So
there
are
several
things
going
on
so,
while
in
the
capital
group,
as
well
as
long-range,
planning
and
I,
would
imagine
in
other
departments,
one
of
the
things
we're
trying
to
do
is
engage
the
community
as
best
we
can.
So
we
try
to
do
the
right
things,
but
one
of
the
things
you
need
to
do
is
make
contacts
and
find
contacts
for
those
and
that's
where
we're
struggling
and
that's
what
takes
time
so
we're
hoping
as
we
go
along
we're
developing
more
and
more
contacts,
and
so
we
can
grab
more
people.
G
The
other
thing
the
flip
side
is
to
go
through
and
make
sure
we're
looking
through
everything
through
a
good
lens,
not
using
our
own
viruses
and
everything.
So
that's
where
this
checklist
comes
in,
and
so
what
we
do
is
the
Dei
consultant
Works
under
the
executive
office.
So
we
actually
met
with
somebody
from
the
executive
office.
Dei
consultant
didn't
have
time
and
we
ran
through
this
checklist
and
tried
to
make
sure
we
answer
the
questions
just
to
as
a
double
check
to
make
sure
we're
doing
the
best
we
can.
F
G
C
Yeah.
Thank
you
for
doing
this.
This
is
actually
a
really
great
checklist
and
I.
Think
probably
the
best
part
of
the
checklist
is
not
necessarily
the
responses
that
are
safe
as
a
conversation
that
you
had
with
somebody
outside
your
department
and
then
it
seems
like
everything,
kind
of
is
based
on
number
seven,
which
is
getting
the
contact
and
conversations
going.
C
G
G
B
Thank
you,
I
was
wondering
and
thank
you
so
much
for
this
wonderful
presentation
in
your
really
unthoughtful
responses.
I
was
looking
at
the
the
map
you
handed
out.
I
didn't
at
least
my
copy
from
the
earlier.
Our
previous
meeting
and
I
didn't
notice
that
there
was
any
plans
to
develop
or
improve
the
bike
Lanes
along
Beardsley
after
the
overpass
and
I
can't
for
Life
me
remember.
F
B
You
know
to
get
the
full
sense
of
the
project
yeah,
but
then
to
then
heading
from
Beardsley
down
towards
Main
Street
yeah
I
didn't
see
that
as
being
a
priority
project,
I
only
saw
the
prioritized
priorities
at
Main
Street
and
connecting
across
the
North
Creek
Trail
to
or
excuse
me
195th
over
405,
as
opposed
to
down
Beardsley.
Okay.
F
D
A
Great,
we
have
a
motion
and
a
second
to
continue
the
public
hearing
on
the
bike
plan
to
October
19th,
all
those
in
favor
say:
aye
aye,
aye
I.
Have
you
unanimous
consent?
Thank
you.
So
much
next
item
on
the
agenda
is
another
public
hearing
on
parking
minimum
reductions
near
frequent
Transit
senior
planner
Boyd.
Are
we
ready
to
proceed
now
or
a
brief
break.
A
A
A
A
E
E
E
So
every
potentially
every
bus
stop
that
can
development
near
every
bus.
Stop
can
get
a
Transit
reduction.
The
radius
is
only
660
feet
in
those
Provisions.
So
it's
the
darker
purple
circles
that
you
see
here
and
the
amount
of
reduction
varies
depending
on
how
many
Transit
runs
there
are
during
morning
and
and
evening,
Peak
periods.
E
So
so
those
are
somewhat
more
limited
than
the
the
more
recent
Transit
State
mandated
reductions.
So,
as
I
said,
we
are,
we
started
off
by
looking
at
affordable
housing
Provisions
in
went
to
a
company,
expanding
the
radius
for
market
rate
reductions
from
a
quarter
to
Half,
Mile
and
and
we've
expanded
on
that
further
as
we've.
E
If
we,
as
we've
reviewed
this
we've
already
done
parking
reductions
in
our
downtown
and
Canyon
Park
plans
in
downtown,
they
now
apply
to
all
of
the
the
districts
who
have
parking
reductions
compared
to
Citywide
standards
and
in
Canyon
Park.
All
the
areas,
the
pinkish
areas
where
residential
is
is
allowed,
have
reduced
parking
requirements
and
and
in
Canyon
Park
was
the
first
time
where
we
paired
those
with
affordable
housing
provisions.
E
Foreign
one
of
the
things
we
heard
early
on
from
Planning
Commission
was
that
you
wanted
to
consider
proposed
future
Transit,
and
so
we
have
the
Swift
line
that
once
we
do,
the
improvements
to
Bothell
Way,
we'll
CT
has
said
that
they
will.
They
would
like
to
extend
Swift
from
Canyon
Park
down
to
to
downtown
and
the
campus
with
a
likely
bus
stop
at
at
240th.
E
E
E
E
So
because
the
table
is
all
new
and
the
sections
that
we
are
deleted
to
put
into
the
table
are
shown
in
the
proposed
code
amendments
and
strike
their
language.
We
didn't
do
the
traditional
underlying
strike
through
language
on
the
table.
This
is
this
is
all
new,
even
though
some
of
it
is
is
essentially
being
transferred
from
the
previous
code
Provisions.
E
But
the
legal
review
added
off
Street
to
the
title
of
this
table
off
street
parking
reduction
table
just
for
clarity
and
I,
also
added
off
Street
and
and
made
changes
in
the
headings
of
these
columns,
and
we
made
some
changes
to
make
them
more
consistent.
So
in
the
in
the
middle
column,
here
well
in
the
in
the
left
column,
it
really
is
just
a
description
of
of
the
category
that
we're
discussing
in
that
row.
E
Middle
column
are
kind
of
the
base,
reductions
that
are
allowed
without
any
any
parking
study,
either
by
the
existing
code
or
or
Provisions
that
have
are,
are
being
made
here
and
then
the
the
right
column
are
the
reductions
justified
by
a
parking
study
and
accompanied
by
an
affordable
housing
requirement
and
that's
consistent
throughout
the
table.
It
it
wasn't
entirely.
E
So
previously
we
still
have
in
here
we
kept
the
option
one
and
option
two
on
row,
two
for
and
and
those
May
apply
to
a
couple
of
other
rows
here
as
well.
We
did
hear
some
support
from
some
Commissioners
to
an
option
that
that
didn't
have
any
any
floor
for
reductions
with
a
parking
study
so
option.
One
does
establish
a
floor
so
that
we
have
a
something
that
we
can
do.
The
affordable
housing
analysis
to
to
say,
give
a
specific,
affordable
housing
requirement.
I
E
E
The
other
thing
in
row,
six
in
July
20th.
We
were
saying
that
basically
taking
the
reductions
that
we
were
allowing
for
corner
lot,
duplexes
and
applying
them
to
all
middle
housing.
But
since
this
is
at
least
potentially
and
and
that
made
sense
as
we
were
taking
these
forward
together.
But
since
this
potentially
is
gonna
move
forward
ahead
of
the
middle
housing.
We've
taken
that
out
and
then
we'll
we'll
put
that
in
with
the
middle
housing
amendments
when
they,
when
they
go
to
council.
E
And
as
I
said
as
drafted,
the
the
reductions
for
additional
reductions
in
downtown
Canyon
Park
would
match
the
option
too
reductions
above
so
next
steps
any
other
clarifying
questions
or
comments
public
testimony.
If
any
and
I'll
check
to
see
if
there
is
anybody
in
the
room
deliberations
and
then
a
motion
to
vote
and
approve
the
recommendation
as
as
may
be
amended
and
and
I
guess,
the
first
order
of
business
when
you
get
to
deliberations
would
be
going
back
to
those
those
option.
E
A
C
A
E
A
H
Thank
you.
This
might
be
a
question
for
Mike,
Stanger
or
or
a
senior
planner
Boyd
section.
Two
excuse
me
on
the
table.
I
apologize
I
just
want
to
make
sure
I
understand
it
because
I'm
one
of
the
people
who
has
to
try
and
apply
this
code
to
my
work
and
it's
really
complicated
but
reduced
by
by
two
percent
for
each
qualified
Transit
run.
It
stops
within
660
feet
up
to
a
maximum
reduction
of
20
percent.
H
H
E
H
H
I'm
mixing
the
code
sections
up,
okay
and
then
the
row
five
and
the
table
going
back
to
the
section
that
the
other
Commissioners
were
just
talking
about.
Maybe
this
is
a
director
rulers
or
not
rule
but
determination.
It's
reduced
them
to
a
minimum
of
one
space
per
bedroom,
provided
there
is
on-street
parking
available
within
800
feet
equal
to
one
half
the
required
parking
and
I
walk
around
downtown
a
lot
and
I'm
sure
we'll
go
for
a
lot
of
Bothell.
Sometimes
there's
a
well
most
of
the
time.
H
There's
a
ton
of
parking
available,
but
sometimes
there's
not.
Is
there
a
time
period?
Is
it?
Is
it
like
an
average
over
a
week
or
something
that
they
look
at?
How
many
street
spots
there
are
to
determine
whether
they're
spots
are
available
or
not,
because
it
seems
a
little
arbitrary
to
determine
that.
E
H
Oh,
it's
there
so
we'll
probably
be
able
to
count
it
got.
It
exists,
okay,
yeah,
so
it's
a
little
kind
of
an
easy
application
that
makes
sense
all
right
and
then
I
don't
know.
This
is
maybe
just
a
I.
Don't
know
if
it's
clarification.
Question
is
just
interesting
to
me:
I'm
I'm,
still
puzzled
as
to
why
we
made
the
decision
in
our
code
to,
for
example,
number
three
housing
units
that
are
affordable
to
very
low
income
or
extremely
low
income.
H
We
still
have
a
really
high
parking
requirement
and
the
reason
that
sticks
to
me
so
much
is
I'm
involved
with
sometimes
affordable
projects.
They
require
enormous
amount
of
subsidy.
I.
Don't
have
to
tell
you
and
Mike
that
Mike's
an
expert
on
this
and
they're
the
hardest
to
get
funded
and
yet
parking
is
really
expensive.
Brings
in
no
tax
money
costs
a
lot
of
money
and
most
people
would
just
be
happy
to
have
a
house
and
they
don't
really
need
a
house
for
their
car.
H
It
just
really
seems
like
low
income
and
very
low
income
should
be
the
same
as
the
senior
and
disabilities.
The
0.3
spaces
I
mean
even
that's
really
high
to
me.
We
all
know
that
I
think
these
are
unnecessary
and
we
should
get
rid
of
them
completely,
but
for
at
least
for
low
income,
very
low
income.
I
I,
don't
know
that
you
know
we're
going
to
change
that
maybe
way
too
late.
But
that's
always
been
puzzling
to
me
because
it's
so
hard
to
get
affordable
housing
built.
J
E
They
now
have
a
a
policy
that
allows
them
to
provide
a
space
or,
if,
if
there's
less
than
one
space
required
an
allowance
equal
to
the
the
required
parking.
So
that
and
that's
where
well,
that's
part
of
where
this
came
comes
from,
but
where
it
really
comes
from
is
the
state
the
state
legislation
that
gave
communities
the
opportunity
to
do
one
space
per
bedroom
or
0.75
spaces
per
unit
and.
I
I
Our
experience,
though,
is
that
with
the
people
who
actually
occupy
the
units
that
we,
the
affordable
housing
properties
that
we
manage
or
or
oversee,
is
that
they
have
cars,
they
commute
to
jobs
and
take
kids
to
school
and
go
to
you
know
other
doctor
appointments
and
shopping
and
everything
else.
They
need
cars
just
as
much
as
anybody
else
and
I
I've
looked
and
haven't
found
any
broad
based,
Empirical
research.
That
demonstrates
that
that's
you
know
otherwise,
for
anybody
else.
I
E
I
H
Right
and
again
it's
an
equity
issue
too.
If
people
who
can
afford
to
pay
for
the
parking
or
pay
for
the
market
rate
unit
get
it,
then
other
people
should
as
well-
and
you
know,
like
you,
said
our
culture
we've
made.
You
have
to
drive
to
everything,
so
we
set
ourselves
up
for
that.
Oh
appreciate
it.
A
Think
it
would
be
good
to
bring
up
the
slide
with
the
option.
One
versus
option
two,
which
is
the
main
consideration
for
deliberation,
that'd,
be
helpful,
but
if
there's
other
comments
or
questions
now
is
the
time
for
those
as
well
and
commissioner
Robson.
If
you're
still
on
the
zoom
I
can't
see
you
so
raise
your
virtual
hand
so
that
you
can
get
my
attention.
Thank
you,
foreign.
A
You
know
parking
study
if
it's
going
to
be
paid
for
and
conducted
by
a
professional,
it's
going
to
be
like
using
the
right
size,
calculator
for
an
individual
parcel,
it's
going
to
be
custom
and
so
I
would
tend
to
agree.
You
know
like
that
establishing
a
floor
when
a
very
custom
study
for
that
point
in
time
is
done,
seems
a
bit
redundant
and
a
little
may
be
too
restrictive.
So
that's
my
perspective.
E
D
E
I
A
E
It's
it's
really
just
a
matter
of
getting
it
on
on
the
council
calendar.
If
Planning
Commission
makes
its
recommendation
tonight,
we'll
be
looking
for
openings
to
to
get
it
on
on
the
council
calendar
so
and
we
so
we're
hoping
that
that
we
would
be
able
to
do
that
now.
The
council
calendars
is
pretty
full
this
time
of
year,
especially
with
on
a
in
a
budget
year,
so
hopefully,
by
the
end
of
the
year.
We
would
get
this
to
council.
A
C
Thank
you,
Sarah
Gustafson,
here
I
wanted
to
take
a
look
at
line
five
for
the
market
rate
multi-family
dwelling
units.
It
looks
like
for
the
base
reductions,
there's
a
one
space
per
bedroom,
so
that
would
mean
one
bedroom.
One
car
two
bedrooms,
two
cars
that
might
make
sense.
Two
people
two
cars,
but
then,
when
we
get
two
three
bedrooms
for
the
few
market
rate
apartments
that
have
three
bedrooms,
I,
don't
think
it
makes
sense
to
have
three
spaces
required.
E
C
E
Well,
so
we
there
was
a
discussion
and,
and
a
majority
of
Commissioners
weighed
in
that
they
would
prefer
not
to
have
a
floor
that
was
in.
It
was
first
an
option
in
in
row
two,
but
it
could
also
be
an
option
in
row.
Five,
which
has
the
same
what's
shown
in
row.
Five
is,
is
the
option
one
from
row
two,
so
that
would
certainly
be
appropriate
whether
whether
you
want
to
go
with
the
option
one
instead
for.
I
C
Yes,
although
I
don't
know,
if
I
should
give
it
to
commissioner
westerbeck
next
I
do
like
the
option
two
in
general,
but
I
am
concerned
about
the
ease
of
administering
it.
If
we
leave
it
all
up
to
discretion,
we
don't
have
guide
posts.
So
I
would
leave
that
to
staff
to
advise
us
on
which
option
could
be
easier.
E
Well,
you're
right:
the
the
prescriptive
option
is
easier
option.
Two
would
require
kind
of
a
an
analysis
analysis
for
each
project,
but
and
which
would
be
included
in
there
affordable
housing
agreement.
So
there
will
any
project
that
that
has
required.
Affordable
units
will
have
to
do
an
affordable
housing
agreement.
It's
just
one
more
one,
more
step
that
will
need
to
be
taken
in
that
and
it's
a
step.
E
H
Okay,
this
is
about
the.
If
it's
okay,
to
ask
about
the
the
downtown
transition,
District
requirements,
charts
I,
know
the
current
code,
because
I
dealt
with
this
recently
looks
like
we
not
only
we
did.
We
change
it
to
0.75
per
bedroom,
but
now
it
says
Studios
and
micro.
Apartments
and
you
know
micro
apartments
require
a
shared
kitchen.
H
The
studio
is
just
to
clarify.
Your
studio
is
just
to
basically
a
studio
apartment,
but
it
doesn't
it's
a
standalone
apartment.
It's
not
just
the
shared
kitchen,
like
the
micro
all
right,
so
that's
a
change
from
our
current
code.
Correct,
because
right
now
it
just
says
micro
for
the
0.75.
Okay,
I
just
wanted
to
clarify
dealing
with
that
a
little
bit
right
now,
so
I
just
wanted
to
see
if
that
was
gonna.
E
H
J
I
might
be
overthinking
this,
but
on
that
same
downtown
transition
chart,
there's
a
call
out
between
pedestrian-oriented
retail,
except
eating
and
drinking
pedestrian
oriented
for
eating
and
drinking,
but
then
also
other
types,
but
they
all
have
the
same
parking
minimum.
Why
are
those
separated
necessarily
like?
What's
the?
J
E
E
Okay,
I'm
I'm,
recalling
it
so
the
thinking
was
that
shared
parking
for
a
a
retail
establishment.
That's
that's
essentially
open
during
business
hours,
for
the
is
easier
to
share
with
residential
parking,
where
the
the
tenants
are
gone
during
business
hours,
restaurants
and
and
bars
where
the
clientele's
there
during
the
evenings,
when
when
the
residents
are
typically
home,
except
for
the
ones
that
are
out
drinking
somewhere
else
that
so
that
I
think
was
the
rationale
behind
limiting
the
shared
parking
reduction
to
to
the
retail.
E
I
do
know
when
we,
when
we
were
taking
a
closer
look
at
particularly
six
Oaks
and
and
and
their
parking
situation,
what
we
heard
from
the
folks
managing
that
was
even
even
the
the
spaces
that
were
being
made
available
to
the
to
the
bank
during
their
business
hours,
banking
hours
and
and
available
to
Residents,
who
are
willing
to
not
use
them
during
during
those
hours
at
a
at
a
fairly
significantly
reduced
rate.
They
were
they.
E
E
E
A
A
A
E
E
H
H
J
E
E
A
A
H
H
When
we,
when
we
tell
people
developers,
they
have
to
you're
gonna,
get
something
so
you've
got
to
give
something:
I
understand:
that's
state
law
and
everything
it's.
It
verges
on
kind
of
pretextual
planning
too,
which
someday
I'd
like
to
see
eliminated
from
codes
kind
of
getting
getting
them
over
a
barrel.
I
mean
we
need
housing
and
we
we
punish
it.
H
J
Thanks
also
about
number
eight
ironically
I,
the
way
it's
phrased,
it's
kind
of
I
don't
know
I
had
to
reread
it
real
quick
I'm
wondering
if
we
could
say
something
more
like
expanding
existing
Transit,
related
parking
reductions
provides
a
benefit
to
developers
that
encourages
development
of
and
justifies
affordable
housing
requirements
just
to
kind
of
instead
of
just
saying,
provides
a
benefit
to
developers.
You
know
just
like
just
to
kind
of
really
spell
it
out.
People
can
get
kind
of
sensitive,
sometimes
about
benefits
going
to
developers.
B
A
For
the
record
you're
getting
some
stifled
laughter
up
here,
yes,
this
is
I
would
tend
to
agree.
This
is
these
are
all
kind
of
run-ons.
That's
how
code
is
kind
of
written
and
whether
grammatical
or
not
I
do
think
parking
minimums
kind
of
grouping
together.
As
a
compound
word
there,
it
does
make
sense
because
it
is
preceded
by
transit,
related.
J
E
E
E
This
okay
is
that
so,
as
as
you
were
talking,
I
was
adding
minimums
in
there
and
in
some
places
the
hyphen
could
work
in
in
number
seven
reducing
parking
minimums
near
Transit
I,
don't
think
it
makes
sense.
There
number
eight
expanding
existing
Transit
related
parking
minimum
reductions,
and
in
that
case
it
makes
sense.
Are
you
shaking
your
head
or
are
you.
B
This
is
a
this
is
a
a
beast.
I
do
not
envy
you
having
to
wrestle
with,
but
I
understand
the
importance
of
putting
in
the
word
minimums,
but
expanding
minimum
reductions
is
becoming
a
I'm,
probably
just
nitpicking.
It's
probably
fine.
Whatever
you
want
to
do,
I'm,
not
gonna
yeah.
It's
not
a
hill
I
want
to
die
on.
C
C
C
J
A
A
J
E
C
C
C
E
G
C
E
I
A
A
A
A
I
always
have
a
report,
and
I
am
a
member
yeah,
so
middle
housing
tour
went
really
well.
Last
week
it
was
on
Friday.
In
the
afternoon
the
material
was
provided
by
Beau
pop
bottle
lights
for
people-oriented
places.
There
were
about
20
people
who
joined
from
the
community.
It
was
great
to
also
see
interim
director
wind,
chill
plannermond
and
planner
schmeck
thanks
everybody
who
made
it
out.
It
was
really
great
conversations
and
also
pretty
encouraging
to
hear
hear
people's
feedback
on
middle
housing
once
they
saw
it.
A
I
think
moving
forward
as
the
city
proposes
things
getting
out
and
seeing
it
in
person
is
fundamentally
a
different
way
of
looking
at
it
than
on
a
survey
online
or
something
so
that
went
really
well.
I
think
there
were
good
conversations,
not
everyone
was
agreeing
on
every
issue,
but
there
was
definitely
some
consensus
that
was
built,
which
is
great.
A
A
couple
of
other
items:
surface
water
management
at
the
city
of
Bothell
just
issued
their
2022
storm
water
management
program
plan
and
they're
requesting
feedback.
It's
on
the
city's
web
page.
One
of
the
items
that
they
are
focusing
on
in
2022
will
be
yard
care
practices
that
are
prioritizing
stream
side
landowners.
A
We
have
a
lot
of
waterways
in
city
of
Bothell
that
people
live
near
and
I
want
to
make
sure
that
yard
care
practices
are
working
with.
You
know
long-term
plans
about
storm
water
and
water
quality.
So
that's
exciting
feedback
is
requested,
and
then
another
item
to
note
is
that
North,
Creek
Trail,
just
north
of
the
city,
is
finally
the
the
first
phase
that
goes
in
through
basically
bothells
Municipal.
Urban
growth
area
is
done,
so
the
ribbon,
cutting
I
think
is
being
held
tomorrow.
A
I,
don't
know
what
time
it
is,
but
you
can
look
on
Snohomish
County's
webpage
for
more
information,
if
you're
interested
in
that
I
think
that's
an
exciting
piece
of
the
bike
plan
puzzle
and
it's
a
great
way
for
people
on
the
north
side
of
our
city
to
and
from
Beyond
to
access,
businesses
and
services
in
the
Thrashers
Corner
area.
Specifically,
so
that's
exciting.
H
I
just
thought
about
it
right
now.
As
we're
meeting,
there
is
a
presentation
over
at
the
city
of
Kenmore,
which
is
also
concurrently,
doing
missing
middle
code,
changes
and
studies,
and
they
have
an
excellent
speaker,
Karen
perolick,
I,
think
I
hope
I
pronounced
her
name
wrong,
her
her
firm
along
with
her
partner
Dan.
They
invented
the
term
missing
metal
about
a
decade
ago
and
she
gives
I
think
the
best
presentation
in
the
country
on
missing
middle
seen
it
before
so
it's
recorded.
H
C
A
A
There
were
some
people
who
had
taken
the
survey
prior,
the
city's
survey
and
not
everyone
who
met
up
with
us
at
City,
Hall
Plaza
went
on
the
walk.
There
were
a
couple
of
people
that
trailed
off
or
went
to
do
other
things,
but
yeah,
and
there
were
some
concerns
about
the
two
are
being
held
around
and
walking
isn't
feasible
for
everyone
too.
So
there
were
some
questions
of
whether
we
could
record
and
that
we
weren't
set
up
to
do
that
sort
of
thing.
A
There
was
a
considerable
discussion
about
affordability
and
whether
producing
or
developing
a
new
middle
housing
form
would
result
in
an
immediate,
affordable
unit,
which
we
all
know
here
on
the
commission.
Isn't
necessarily
that-
and
you
know
that's
not
the
point
of
middle
housing
is
also
to
offer
different
housing
forms
and
and
trying
to
get
at
affordability
from
a
more
macroeconomic
scale.
There's
also
a
some
discussion
about
you
know.
A
A
For
me,
one
of
my
Reflections
is
constantly
learning
about
how
other
people
learn
these
topics
and
how
really
complex
they
can
be,
and
so
I
was
encouraged
to
hear
that
people
were
understanding
some
things
and
maybe
there's
some
places
that
we
can
work
on,
especially
around
I.
Think
when
you
start
framing
numbers,
there's
some
glossing
over
of
eyes
to
borrow
commissioner
robson's
term,
and
so
that's
a
place
that
I
think
the
messaging
and
some
of
the
conversations
that
we
have
can
really
be
aware
of
so
I
hope.
That's
helpful,
I.
H
H
They
they're
just
completely
shocked,
because
just
not
something
that
they've
ever
thought
about
and
so
I
think
it's
a
little
bit
of
a
you
know,
a
shocking
kind
of
really
when
they
find
out
a
person
couldn't
just
choose
to
build
a
duplex
instead
of
a
single
family
home.
So
that's
kind
of
one
of
the
AHA
moments.
You
know
we
get
to
have
I.
Think
that's
good
people
realize
that
there
are
real
restrictions,
I
mean
they
didn't
even
realize
they
were
there.