►
From YouTube: Bothell Planning Commission Meeting - July 20, 2022
Description
0:04:45 - Public Comments
0:05:25 - Approval of Minutes
0:06:30 - New Business
0:07:25 - Public Hearing: Middle Housing Code Amendments (continued)
1:54:40 - Public Hearing: Parking Reductions near Frequent Transit (continued)
2:13:55 - Study Session: Bike Plan
3:02:50 - Reports from Staff
3:05:30 - Reports from Members
B
B
Before
we
move
on
to
the
agenda
items,
I'd
like
to
acknowledge
our
hybrid
meeting
format-
and
this
is
our
first
hybrid
meeting-
so
please
forgive
us
as
we
stumble
through
the
city
of
bothell-
is
providing
the
option
to
attend
this
meeting,
either
in
person
or
remotely
by
a
zoom
for
those
participating
via
zoom.
The
track
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.
B
B
B
First
time
I
want
to
be
sure
we
get.
There
is
a
sheet
there.
We
just
didn't
and
push
it.
The
imagine,
bottles,
notice,
city
website
and
tonight's
agenda
all
provided
information
to
the
public
on
providing
comments.
Video
of
this
meeting
will
be
streamed,
live
as
well
as
recorded
and
available
for
later.
Viewing
on
the
city's
youtube
channel.
B
B
D
F
B
All
right,
so
all
the
commissioners
are
here
either
on
the
either
in
person
or
remotely
also
attending.
We
have
deputy
community
development
director,
ashley,
winchell
and
kirsten
mant
senior
planner,
any
others.
We
should
introduce
all
right
remotely.
We
have
senior
planner
dave
boyd
and
I
believe
we
may
have
other
staff
coming
in
later
when
their
agenda
items
come
up.
B
If
you
are
also
streaming
the
live,
video
feed.
Please
turn
the
sound
off
as
there
is
a
delay
for
the
commissioners
at
specific
breaks
in
the
presentation
I'll
be
calling
on
members
who
wish
to
speak
or
ask
a
question,
and
I've
asked
staff
to
help
me
with
that,
looking
both
on
the
dials
here
and
on
the
screen
and
maybe
a
challenge.
So
if
I
don't
catch
you
right
away,
no
offense
intended.
B
B
B
B
B
B
G
We'd
like
to
formally
introduce
our
new
addition
to
the
strategic
planning
team.
This
is
kirsten.
Mant
she's
been
with
the
city
of
bothell,
for
about
four
years,
she's
been
in
our
development
services
group
and
she's
recently
been
promoted
to
senior
planner,
so
she'll
be
filling
the
role
that
nathan
lamb
was
previously
in
I'll
pass
it
off
to
kirsten.
If
you
just
want
to
say
hi,
you
know.
H
B
B
A
B
A
Okay,
so
I'll
start
it
off,
I'm
going
to
pass
it
off
to
sierra
and
and
then
I'll
I'll
wrap
it
up.
So
this
is
a
continued
public
hearing
on
the
baffle,
mis
middle
housing
code.
Amendments
agenda
for
tonight
is
to
present
updates
to
the
proposed
code
amendments
based
on
input
that
we
got
from
planning
commission
on
june
15th
and
to
discuss
some
new
timing
for
the
code
amendments
on
june
15th.
A
I
did
inform
planning
commission
that
we
were
applying
for
another
department
of
commerce
grant
to
address
middle
housing
implementation.
We
just
got
word
yesterday
that
we
have
received
that
grant
so
we'll
be
giving
you
a
little
more
information
about
that,
and
that
is
the
reason
for
in
the
memo
the
staff
recommendation.
A
I
Perfect,
thank
you
dave
and
good
evening.
Commissioners,
we
have
a
few
short
slides
to
run
through
tonight,
and
these
are
the
main
updates
to
the
proposed
middle
housing
code
amendments
that
have
been
done
since
they
last
met
I'll
quickly
run
through
the
highlights.
There
are
a
few
questions
scattered
throughout
the
slides.
I
I
I
Our
next
comic
topic
tonight
is
on
lot
size
averaging
the
proposed
code
amendments
state
that
all
subdivisions
will
be
eligible
for
lot
size
averaging.
The
lot
sizes
may
vary
throughout
the
subdivision.
As
long
as
the
averages
of
all
the
lots
in
the
development
still
meet
the
zone
minimum
requirement,
no
individual
lot
can
be
reduced
below
the
minimum
lot
size
for
the
next
densest
zone.
For
example,
lots
in
the
9600
zone
cannot
be
reduced
to
below
8
400
square
feet,
and
lots
in
the
8400
zone
cannot
be
reduced
below
7
200
square
feet.
I
These
proposed
amendments
to
lot
averaging
also
allow
for
a
20
reduction
in
the
required
lot
circle,
and
our
question
on
here
that
we'll
come
back
to
at
the
end.
As
regarding
whether
these
lot
size
averaging
allowances
should
apply
only
to
subdivisions
that
incorporate
middle
housing
development
next
slide.
Please.
A
I
I
I
And
our
last
item
tonight
is
updates
to
the
adu
regulations.
The
proposed
code
amendments
to
the
adu
regulations
include
allowing
up
to
two
adus,
either
attached
or
detached
per
single
family
dwelling
unit.
These
regulations
include
also
allowing
one
edu
allowed
on
other
residential
lots,
such
as
lots
with
a
duplex
or
a
triplex
in
order
to
diff
differentiate
between
a
multi-unit
house
and
a
single-family
home
with
an
adu.
The
the
applicant
during
the
application
and
permitting
process
will
need
to
specify
what
type
of
development
they
are
proposing
during
that
process.
I
For
example,
if
a
homeowner
wants
to
carve
out
an
additional
living
space
in
their
home,
they
would
need
to
decide
whether
they're
creating
a
unit
that's
accessory
to
their
main
home
or
whether
they
want
to
turn
the
entire
home
into
a
duplex.
The
two
separate
units,
these
updates
to
the
adu
code
code,
would
also
require
one
additional
parking
space
for
an
edu,
but
this
requirement
would
be
waived
if
the
property
has
access
to
on-street
parking
and
is
close
to
trail
and
transit
access,
similar
to
other
parking
reductions
in
the
code.
A
These
were
some
things
that
we
knew
that
we
wanted
to
work
on,
but
previously
there
our
approach
was
to
get
the
zoning
changes
in
place
and
and
then
follow
with
some
of
these
other
implementation
strategies,
but
we
do
think
it's
worth
putting
it
hold
on
on
the
zoning
changes
in
case.
There
are
some
things
that
come
up
in
this.
This
additional
outreach
and
analysis
that
that
might
cause
us
to
want
to
tweak
the
approach.
A
A
big
part
of
this
is
additional
community
engagement
and
you
will
see
some
of
you
the
comment.
Letters
have
been
critical
that
we
haven't
found
a
way
to
reach
out
to
all
the
single-family
property
owners
in
the
city,
and
so
this
we'll
be
looking
into
how
how
we
might
be
able
to
do
that
or
do
a
better
job
of
that
going
forward,
and
it
also
provides
time
and
money
for
us
to
do
an
additional
analysis
of
the
utilities,
fire
and
building
code
implications.
A
So
we
have
started
that
work
and
we
have
been
pretty
confident
that
that
that
the
the
changes
that
we
are
suggesting
are
consistent
with
those
there
and
there
are
statewide
building
code
changes
that
are
in
the
works
that
will
facilitate
new
middle
housing,
development
of
new
middle
housing
types
under
the
international
residential
code.
But
again
those
those
discussions
are
ongoing.
A
J
J
A
So
so
with
that,
we
didn't
put
it
on
the
slide
here,
but
open
enough
for
any
clarifying
questions
from
commission,
followed
by
public
testimony.
I
know
that
we
have
at
least
one
online
participant
that
wants
to
testify
and
I'll
leave
it
up
to
those
in
the
room.
To
tell
me
if
there
are
any
others
in
the
room.
B
A
I
guess
I
would
suggest
that
first,
if
there
are
any
clarifying
questions,
general
questions
and
and
we've
identified
some
questions,
but
if
planning
commissioners
have
questions
too,
we
can
we
can
address
those
and
then
take
public
testimony
and
then
and
then
we
can
go
into
discussion.
That's
that's.
B
K
A
E
Thank
you.
There
were
a
couple
of
places
in
the
slide
where
we
talk
about
building
near
transit
and
close
to
trails.
Do
we
have
any
sort
of
specificity
regarding
what
near
and
close
will
mean,
or
will
that
be
left
up
to
interpretation
at
the
time
of
requesting
permitting
building
that
sort
of
thing.
A
J
A
We've
since
gotten
some
comments
and
in
fact
there
was
a
version
of
state
legislation
that
didn't
pass,
but
but
it
was
being
considered
that
said
that
the
the
proximity
to
to
transit
at
least
should
be
based
on
walking
distance.
So
we
we
have
had
some
discussion
about
that.
I
think
there
was
consensus
there.
F
F
A
I
have
to
confess
we
haven't
gotten
into
that
in
much
detail,
so
we
will
be
working
with
consultants,
we'll
be
having
discussions
with
otac
about
what
part
of
the
this
work
they
could
do
on
a
continuing
basis.
We
will
we've
also
identified
that
we
will
be
working
with
the
city's
diversity,
equity
and
inclusion,
consultant,
chad
and
kelly
ray,
and
we
are
also
working
with
other
arch
jurisdictions
that
have
also
applied
for,
and
I
assume.
J
H
A
G
And
so
we
can
provide
that
to
you
all.
I
think
it'll
help
kind
of
show
the
full
picture
of
the
existing
work
and
how
this
fits
into
it.
One
of
the
things
that
was
delayed
with
this
work
or
or
deferred
was
comprehensive
plan
amendments
to
support
middle
housing,
and
so
this
helps
us
start.
Looking
at
our
comprehensive
plan
prepare
for
the
comprehensive
plan
update
to
figure
out
what
we
may
need
to
do
to
better
support
middle
housing
and
the
comprehensive
plan
so
that
we
have
policies
and
regulations
that
are
tied
together
and
support
each
other.
G
And
so
when
we
have
these
conversations
with
the
public,
it
gives
us
opportunity
to
talk
about
both
policy
and
regulation
with
the
public
and
hear
more
from
people
about
what
we
can
do
to
better
represent
some
of
the
things
we're
hearing
from
the
community
and
then
also
understand
things
we
may
need
to
tweak
or
think
about.
As
we
move
these
regulations
and
policies
forward.
B
A
A
H
B
Thank
you,
yeah,
there's
a
balance
between
getting
that
community
outreach
and
the
interest
of
some
and
moving
quickly
to
address
these
issues,
so
keep
in
touch
all
right.
So
with
that,
I
think
we'll
go
to
the
public
comment
portion
of
the
hearing,
and
then
I
know
we
have
at
least
one
individual
who
wants
to
speak
with
us.
A
B
L
Hi,
my
name
is
justin
buffard,
I'm
a
long
time,
bothell
resident.
I
moved
here
in
2010,
it's
my
only
home
I've
purchased
here,
and
I've
lived
here
since
before
it
was
even
a
city
of
bothell.
For
me
anyway,
I'm
here
to
speak
for
the
middle
housing
amendments.
I
received
the
amendments
from
dave.
I've
been
working
with
dave
and
kerry
and
and
such
and
on
the
topic,
mostly
of
parking
requirements
for
adus.
L
I
have
a
corner
lot
and
I
have
a
security
camera
that
could
show
that
every
single
night
there's,
not
one
person
parked
there.
So
my
feedback
here
is
that,
especially
for
adus
that
the
question
shouldn't
be
so
much
do
you
have
to
add
additional
parking
is,
is
it
is
it?
Could
it
be
reasonable
to
believe
that
the
person
in
the
edu
would
have
access
to
reasonable
parking?
And,
in
my
case,
there's
no
question?
There's
tons
of
tons
across
the
street
there's
some
directly
in
front
of
my
home.
L
L
So
that
was
a
nice
little
surprise
for
me,
but
anyway,
the
city
of
portland,
los
angeles,
and
what
am
I
saying,
seattle
both
said:
zero
for
80
use,
which
was
in
the
first
draft
of
the
zoning
amendments,
and
I
think
that
kind
of
makes
more
sense,
especially
or
at
least
especially
for
existing
conversions.
It's
just
it's
really
hard
to
cure
something,
or
I
can't
even
do
it.
I
have
a
very,
very
large
lot,
but
I
can't
do
it.
I
can't
add
parking,
but
I
need
more
parking.
L
Therefore,
I
can't
do
my
conversion,
it's
yeah.
So,
on
the
topic
of
setbacks,
I
was
a
little
disappointed
to
see
that
we
didn't
do
five.
Five,
it's
still
5
15..
It
creates
a
sort
of
a
patchwork
of
setbacks
on
the
side,
because
it's
not
defined
if
it
has
to
be
on
one
side
or
the
other.
Some
people
do
five
five.
L
Actually,
five
ten,
some
people
do
seven
five,
seven
five,
some
people
do
something
in
between
and
it
creates
irregularly
spaced
lots
where,
at
least
as
far
as
I
can
tell
most
jurisdictions,
just
do
five:
five
percent
side,
yard
setbacks
and
that's,
I
think,
a
little
bit
less
debatable
compared
to
the
front
and
rear
earth
setbacks.
I
personally
believe
that
we
should
move
to
just
five
five
and
just
be
consistent
and
simplify
things
rather
than
having
this
sort
of
strange
15
total
at
the
minimum.
Five
on
one
side
type
of
thing.
L
L
I
want
to
provide
a
garage,
I
think
it's
best
to
have
a
townhouse
rather
than
like,
like
I
own,
I'm
an
experienced
landlord
and
I
have
duplexes
four
plex
things
like
that,
and
my
four
plex
is
your
traditional
four
plex
with
the
stairs
in
the
middle.
There
are
people
above
and
below.
I
think
people
prefer
not
having
people
above
and
below
them
and
for
me
to
provide
townhouse
style
duplexes.
L
I
need
the
ability
to
have
that
garage
on
the
lower
level
and
just
give
me
a
bit
of
extra
room
breathing
room,
because
I've
looked
at
some
sample
plans
and
I
don't
think
I've
seen
one
that
is
30
feet
or
below
they're
all
between
30
and
35
feet,
because
the
garage
adds
a
bit
of
height.
And
so
I
was
hoping
that
the
middle
housing
initiative
would
allow
us
to
gain
that
35th
foot.
If,
if
possible,.
L
Oh,
I
guess
we
don't
need
transit
because
it's
not
dense
enough,
but
then
we
just
keep
destroying
more
and
more
and
more
so
just
allow
the
citizens
to
help
kind
of
remove
the
regulations
that
that
have
been
successful
in
other
cities
and
I'm
really
hoping
that
we
can
get
one
more
change
here.
But
thank
you.
B
A
Well,
we're
waiting
for
any
others.
I
wanted
to
point
out
that
that
late
email
that
you
got
from
mr
buffard,
I
will
enter
into
the
exhibit
says,
exhibit
13,
and
then
I
also
this
afternoon
emailed
the
commission.
A
number
of
other
exhibits
that
we've
received
in
the
last
two
days,
which
I'll
I'll
enumerate
now
I
meant
to
do
this
earlier,
exhibit
seven
from
robert
farrar
exhibit
eight
from
artist
schmiegel.
B
D
N
M
M
M
So
my
wife
and
I
we
can't
find
a
place
to
live.
We
decided
to
sell
our
house
where
we
raised
our
kids
and
they
went
to
school
and
we
were
going
to
downsize
well
within
for
an
hour
drive
anywhere
on
the
compass.
We
can't
find
what
we're
looking
for,
but
then
we
did
there's
two
places
within
15
minute
drive
from
here.
M
B
L
L
Because,
with
the
current
rules,
you
have
to
have
whole
lots
and
if
you
can't
reach
that
number,
it's
effectively
wasted
land
or
you
have
to
create
sort
of
a
larger
lot
with
what
is
going
to
effectively
be
again
wasted
land
because
somebody'll
either
have
like
a
weird
place
for
a
yard
or
something
along
those
lines.
So
if,
if
it
were
not
limited
to
just
mental
housing,
it
could
be
an
sfr.
A
good
developer
could
create
a
reduced
lot.
L
That's
kind
of
in
the
corner
of
an
existing
lot
but
add
middle
housing
elsewhere,
where
it's
it's
a
little
bit
better.
But
the
again
the
goal
is
efficient
use
of
land,
increasing
housing
stock.
I'd
rather
take
one
additional
sfr,
then
nothing
right,
it's
still
better
than
nothing
so
that
that
was
my
comment
on
that.
So
I'm
hoping
the
answer
comes
back
no.
A
N
Wonderful,
thank
you
so
much
and
it's
wonderful
to
be
here.
I
apologize,
though,
that
I'm
not
was
unable
to
be
there
in
person
today,
but
I
do
want
to
make
sure
to
know
that
or
you
all
know
that
I
am
incredibly
grateful
for
the
opportunity
to
comment
virtually
my
name
is
ryan
donahue
and
I
am
the
chief
advocacy
officer
at
habitat
for
humanity,
seattle,
king
and
kittitas
counties,
as
well
as
the
co-chair
of
the
eastside,
affordable
housing
coalition
on
behalf
of
habitat
for
humanity.
N
I
want
to
take
a
moment
here
and
express
our
full-throated
support,
not
only
for
your
work
on
these
missile-made
media.
Sorry,
these
middle
housing
code
amendments
today,
and
not
just
for
your
work
on
around
parking
reduction
near
frequent
transit,
but
honestly
for
all
of
the
amazing
work
that
you
all
have
been
engaging
in
over
the
last
few
years.
Your
work
has
really
highlighted
just
what
an
amazing
place.
Bothell
is,
and
you
deserve
immense
praise
for
that.
N
I
am
here
today
in
strong
support
of
the
work
that
you
were
doing,
particularly
around
the
middle
missing
or
the
middle
housing
code.
Amendments
proposal,
that's
included
in
your
discussion
today,
I'm
used
to
having
to
come
to
these
meetings
and
having
a
list
of
recommended
adjustments
that
I
would
encourage
you
to
consider
usually
there's
four
five,
six,
seven
things
that
I'll
have
listed
out
today.
However,
my
job
is
pretty
easy
because
you
all
as
commissioners
and
your
planning
staff
have
already
done
all
of
the
hard
work.
N
I
basically
just
get
to
say
this
amazing
job.
Thank
you.
That
being
said,
though,
I
wouldn't
be
doing
my
job.
If
I
just
simply
said
this
was
amazing
and
walked
away.
I
do
have
one
small
thing
that
I
would
urge
you
to
consider
and
it's
more
of
a
mindset
issue,
whether
it's
on
middle
missing
or
what's
on
middle
housing
or
any
of
your
work
around
affordable
housing,
make
sure
to
include
home
ownership
as
a
part
of
the
way
you're
thinking
when
it
comes
to
affordable
housing,
adus,
dadus
plexes.
N
These
kind
of
things
are
amazing
options
not
just
for
affordable
rental,
housing
opportunities,
but
also
affordable,
home
ownership
opportunities,
and
I
would
urge
you
to
frame
your
efforts
in
that
context.
Thinking
about
affordable
housing
being
affordable
home
ownership
as
well
as
affordable
rental,
as
you
continue
this
work
on
this,
and
so
many
of
your
other
future
efforts.
I
would
also
urge
you
to
continue
to
think
bold
as
you're
finding
state
already
we're
in
a
housing
crisis
there
are.
B
P
P
And
in
the
last
two
years,
we've
had
bobcats
two
bobcats
and
numbers
of
deers,
just
walking
through
our
property,
because
their
habitat
is
vanishing
and
another
deer
just
showed
up
last
weekend.
And
it's
we're
close
to
block
away.
I
don't
know
where
they
go
once
they
leave
my
property,
but
I'm
really
concerned
about
that
too.
It's
just
the
the
woods
are
disappearing.
The
buildable
land
is
disappearing.
P
We
have
to
do
something,
that's
creative
that
will
save
as
much
habitat,
not
just
for
animals
but
for
ourselves
as
as
possible,
and
I
think
we
can
be
very
creative
about
it
and
still
common
sense
and
and
be
flexible
with
the
height
restriction.
Add
some
flexibility
and
retain
as
many
trees
as
possible,
while,
while
still
providing
maximum
density,
so
I
I
would
like
to
see
this
go
forward
and
I
certainly
support
you
in
every
effort
in
that
in
that
direction.
B
O
My
my
name
is
aaron
sagan
and,
as
you
can
probably
assume,
from
the
slightly
awkward
but
joint
zoom
account
platform
thing
that
we're
doing
here.
We
live
in
a
multi-generational
home,
so
I'm
speaking
to
somebody
who
lives
in
that
kind
of
household
and
I've
lived
in
bothell,
I
would
say
continuously
for
the
last
10
years
we
moved
back
from
north
carolina
after
I
went
to
school
there
and
we
started
a
family
here
we
have
two
small
children,
and
so
I
you
know
so.
O
I
wanted
to
provide
comment
actually
at
the
first
meeting
ever
because
bothell
really
needs
to
legalize
middle
housing,
and
you
know
to
be
honest,
like
the
recommendations,
I
I
fully
support
and
endorse.
I
mean
as
much
as
I
can
read,
because
those
were
a
lot
of
pages
of
a
lot
of
a
lot
of
planning,
jargon
and
engineering
jargon.
I
mean
maybe
not
an
engineering
jargon
but-
and
you
know
just
two
two
things
that
I
would
actually
like
to
see.
O
The
city
go
beyond
because
truth
be
told
it's
like
a
four-plex,
it's
an
increase
in
density,
but
from
what
I've
been
reading
from
people
who
write
on
this
topic-
and
you
know,
study
this
and
even
do
work
on
it,
like
architects
and
other
public
planners
online.
It's
it's
actually
still
pretty
conservative,
considering
what
our
needs
are
with
growth
and
with
climate
change
and
affordability
and,
as
the
previous
speaker
said,
or
two
previous
speakers
ago,
we're
kind
of
at
crisis
point
with
a
few
different
issues.
O
I
hear
a
lot
of
people
talk
about
how
they're
concerned
about
character,
which
I
think
is
kind
of
ironic,
sometimes
because
I
don't
know
if
we're
on
the
same
page
about
what
that
means
on
on.
My
street
literally
is
like
like
side
by
side,
these
kind
of
examples
of
a
multi-family
building,
that's
actually
very
attractive
and
well
designed,
and
then
a
single
family
house
right
next
to
it.
O
I
mean
I
grew
up
in
this
area.
My
great
grandparents
moved
to
this
area,
though
they
weren't
born
here,
and
I
mean
I
have
family
cousins,
my
brother-in-law,
siblings,
the
closest
houses
they
could
buy.
One
was
in
burien
and
the
other
one
is
in
lake
stevens.
Nobody
can
buy
in
this
area
and
like
not
a
single
person
in
my
personal
network
like
nobody,
I
actually
know
who
I
grew
up
with,
has
been
able
to
afford
anything
within.
O
I
don't
know
what
kind
of
mile
radius,
but
it's
a
lot,
and
so
I
know
there's
many
people
with
similar
stories
and
concerns
their
children
or
their
grandchildren
can't
live
close
by
and
that
really
affects
the
way
a
community
grows
and
the
loyalty.
I
think
people
also
have-
and
let
me
just
see
through
zenith,
I'm
sure
I'm
at
three
three
minutes.
I
haven't
been
timing
myself,
but.
J
J
O
To
speak
again,
you
know
once
you
I
think
it
sounds
like
this
deadline
has
been
extended
because
you're
kind
of
pending
on
grants
and
what
and
how
that'll
affect
funding
and
all
that
stuff.
But
this
is
a
really
really
important
issue
to
me
and
it's
for
very
many
reasons,
both
personal
and
political
and
everything
else.
So
thank
you
so
much.
B
B
B
C
A
K
K
J
A
F
A
J
J
A
Has
has
developed
for,
for
you
know,
looking
at
what
the
what
the
benefit
for
whatever
the
increased
capacity
is,
whether
it's
a
reduced
parking
or
increased
height
or
or
density,
and
and
how
that
pencils
out
for
a
developer
and
and
splitting
the
benefit
between
the
developer
and
the
terms
in
the
form
of
increased
units
or
reduced
costs
and
the
city
in
in
the
form
of
affordable
housing.
Okay,.
B
Q
I
understand
I
just
wanted
to
voice
my
support
for
raising
it
to
10
as
well
and
making
it
applicable
to
throughout
the
new
throughout
all
the
all
zones
or
areas.
I
think
the
reasoning
of
the
other
commissioners
is
pretty
sound.
A
lot
of
the
arguments
we
had
of
last
meeting
also
were
very
strongly
in
favor
of
having
the
10
as
opposed
to
five
units.
So
I
just
wanted
to
express
my
support
for
that.
D
Thanks
this
is
carsten.
I
will
echo
what's
been
previously
said
and
furthermore
say
that
I
wouldn't
support
this
this
these
code
amendments
if
they
didn't
apply
all
throughout
the
city,
we
don't
want
to
focus
growth
in
one
specific
area.
That's
a
lot
of
the
concern
that
our
constituents
have
when
we
apply
it
over
the
entire
city.
It
spreads
the
burden
so
that
no
individual
neighborhood
has
to
accommodate
that
growth.
So
I
just
wanted
to
reiterate
that.
E
B
A
A
J
A
A
So
if
you,
if
you
didn't,
want
to
just
restrict
it
to
middle
housing
and
allow
a
lot
size
reduction
proposals
to
apply
to
any
single
family
lot,
maybe
that
would
be
a
way
to
try
out
that
that
requirement
and
require
those
single
family
homes
to
be
adu.
Ready
and
we'd
want
to
study
that
a
little
bit
more
before,
actually
putting
it
in
into
code
language.
But
I'd
be.
B
C
Thank
you
chair.
I
dave
got
me
with
what
he
said,
so
I
find
that
really
intriguing.
I
also
would
say
one
thing
that
I've
been
thinking
about
as
we
talk
about
making
sure
that
no
part
of
the
city
is
is
targeted
with
regulations
also
comes
no
part
of
the
city
being
excluded.
So
one
thing
I
would
be
really
interested
in
learning
more
about,
especially
with
the
delay
in
this
is.
C
Can
we
make
sure
that
hoas
cannot
prevent
homeowners
from
from
having
an
adu
if
they
feel
that
one
is
required
where
they
are?
I
read
some
interesting
analysis
around
that
when
hb
1782
was
still
alive,
but
I
I
wonder
if
that's
something
we
as
a
city
can
take
on
and
say
you
know
you
can't
prevent
it.
You
know
here
for
the
whole
neighborhood.
C
You
know
it's
up
to
the
homeowner
sort
of
a
thing,
so
that's
that's
a
thought
that
I
had
that
was
sort
of
just
tangented
from
what
you
said
dave,
but
I
like
that
idea,
a
lot
honestly.
The
lot
averaging,
I
don't
think
it
needs
to
be
restricted
to
missing
middle
housing.
I
think
there's
a
lot
of
circumstances
where
that
could
help
folks
even
just
increase
the
number
of
houses,
even
if
it's
not
technically
missing
middle.
C
J
A
Had
a
conversation
with
our
deputy
city
attorney
about
whether
we
could
absent
any
state
legislation
restrict
new
hoas
from
prohibiting
middle
housing,
and
he
said
yes,
we
can't
make
that
retroactive.
If
there
are
existing
restrictions,
we
can't
touch
those,
but
we
didn't
specifically
talk
about
edu's
and
I
I
believe
I
have
seen
something
in
in
the
literature
about
a
somewhat
different
approach
or
a
different
path
with
adus.
But
we'd
have
I'd
have
to
look
into
that
further
unless
ashley
or
sierra
know
about
that.
F
H
F
K
K
Keep
my
comments
brief.
Then
I'm
I'm
for
the
lot
averaging
city-wide
for
clarity
and
simplicity
and
being
an
architect
for
20
years.
I
see
so
many
weird
lots.
I
created
all
the
last.
You
know
100
years
plus
sometimes
and
they've
been
you
know.
A
lot
of
averaging
seems
like
it's
been
going
on
along
for
a
long
time.
So
there's
almost
never
a
lot.
K
Once
again,
as
mr
ferrer
mentioned,
you
know
it's
the
best
ipo
in
the
world,
this
land
and
we
need
to
use
it
and
husband.
It
and
you
know
resource
be
resource
wise
and
how
we
use
it
and
what
size
averaging
is
really
smart
in
the
hoa
just
a
suggestion
that
could
be
picked
up
by
staff
later
you
know,
maybe
the
future
hoa
code
or
our
municipal
code
says
the
hoas
can't
prevent
anything.
That's
legally
allowed
in
our
land
use
code.
K
B
B
A
Q
Thank
you.
I
have
a
question
regarding
the
additional
parking
space
with
regards
to
our
first
public
comment.
Now,
regardless
of
the
parking
available
on
the
property,
they
need
to
put
in
an
additional
parking
space
for
every
adu
unless
they
have
street
parking.
Is
that
is
that
the
case?
Am
I
understanding
that
regulation
correctly.
H
A
J
A
A
C
I
guess
my
my
question
is:
let's
say
a
homeowner:
has
a
duplex
has
the
room
for
280
use
and
the
room
to
make
the
parking
if
they
need
it?
Why
not?
Let
them
have
the
280
use
that
a
single
family
residence
could
have?
I
guess
I'm
not
sure
if
I
understand
what
the
the
downsides
are
to
that.
Otherwise
I
mean
I
like
all
of
it.
I
just
I
noticed
that
it
was
different
for
a
duplex
and
I
wondered
why.
A
C
Oh
yeah
totally
so
my
question
on
the
slide.
It
said
that
for
a
single
family
residence
you
could
have
up
to
two
adus
for
a
duplex.
You
could
have
one,
and
my
question
is,
since
we
have
these
requirements
around
parking
and
spacing
and
setbacks
and
everything
if
all
that
is
laid
out,
if
there's
enough
room
on
the
lot,
even
with
the
duplex
4
280
used,
I
would
say:
let
them
have
two
adus
if
they
want
it.
So
my
question
is:
what's
the
downside
of
that
or
is
like?
F
J
B
E
F
It
requires
both
on
street
parking
on
both
sides
for
the
waiver
and
the
half
mile
distance
from
the
transit
stop,
and
I
don't
see
why
it
wouldn't
be
or
because,
if
you
have
the
frontage
and
the
parking
you
meet
the
requirement,
there's
the
parking
there
and
if
you
are
in
half
a
mile
walking
distance.
Ideally,
you
would
meet
the
requirement
and
ideally
not
have
to
have
that
extra
parking.
So
it
seems
to
me
like
or
might
be
a
better
solution,
especially
if
we
firm
up
the
walking
distance.
K
Thank
you,
chair,
just
I'll
weigh
in
quickly.
First
of
all,
I
just
think
that
we
don't
need
to
require
parking
at
all.
Let
the
owners
sort
it
out
in
reading
about
this.
I
read
a
lot
of
stuff
about
adus
because
of
my
work,
largely
the
two
biggest
roadblocks
in
other
cities
have
been
owner
occupancy
and
required
parking
as
soon
as
cities
get
rid
of
that
the
flood
gates
open
and
they
start
to
actually
see
in
10
20
30,
40
40
full.
K
You
know
thousands
more
adus
be
built,
which
is
what
they
usually
want
to
do
when
they
pass
these
ordinances.
So
they've
been
huge
roadblocks.
The
fact
is,
almost
every
single
family
home
in
bothell
has
a
lot
of
parking
already
as
senior
planner
boyd
mentioned
it's
usually
two
in
the
garage
two
on
the
apron.
K
Our
right
of
ways
are
huge.
I
don't
know
if
I've
ever
been
to
someone's
house
or
to
a
party
or
something
like
that,
where
you
you
couldn't
find
a
place
to
park,
it's
it's
almost
absurd
to
think
there's
not
a
place
to
park
in
bothell
when
you
want
to
go
anywhere
here,
even
downtown.
We
come
for
when
we
did
live
here
years
ago
we
came
for
halloween,
halloween
and
fourth
of
july.
We
always
found
a
place
to
park
even
in
downtown
within
a
few
blocks,
so
our
suburbs,
in
the
both
plenty
of
parking.
K
Let's
let
people
decide
on
their
own.
People
like
justin,
should
be
allowed
to
help
us
with
our
housing
problem
for
no
cost
to
us
at
all.
He
wants
to
build
housing
to
help
people
sure
he'll
make
some
money
whatever,
but
it's
a
huge
risk
and
we
want
people
to
do
it,
which
is
why
we're
doing
these
code
changes.
So,
let's
just
get
out
of
the
way.
K
Keep
it
simple,
just
delete
that
part.
Let
it
be
zero.
We
also
have
this
assumption
that
everybody
drives
a
car.
I
mean
25
percent
of
the
population
doesn't
drive
at
all
because
of
age,
disability
whatever
and
then
among
the
people
who
are
of
driving
age
and
ability
we're
seeing
a
big
drop
in
the
number
of
people
who
decide
to
get
driver's
licenses
and
and
on
top
of
all
that
have
has
everyone
been
seeing
the
heat
waves,
not
the
ones
we
had
the
heat
dome.
K
D
D
D
We
have
regulated
extremely
and
it
hasn't
produced
overjoyment
on
the
behalf
of
our
our
neighbors
and
ourselves
on
what
appears
to
be
issues
with
spillover
parking
that
sort
of
thing,
and
so
I
don't
think
that
regulating
it
extremely
and
requiring
it,
a
lot
is
going
to
be
a
good
thing
for
our
future
either.
So,
let's
learn
from
the
mistakes
that
we've
made
in
1960
and
go
forward,
knowing
that
this
is
something
that
we
can
amend
in
the
future
as
well.
E
E
So
I
think
it's
it's
it's
wise
to
maybe
take
a
conservative
approach,
but
some
kind
of
approach
to
a
parking
requirement,
and
I
haven't
given
a
lot
of
thought
at
this
point
to
what
might
be
a
reasonable
middle
ground
middle
ground.
But
I
don't
think
we
should
get
rid
of
a
parking
requirement
altogether.
B
Thank
you,
commissioner,
anders
so
I've
heard
the
proposal
that
we
have,
which
requires
parking.
I've
heard
commissioner
gustafson
suggest,
rather
than
the
and
on
street
parking
and
access
to
the
trail,
make
it
an
oar.
So
if
there's
on-street
parking
available
that
would
suffice
and
I've
heard
commissioners
say
no
parking
requirements
at
all,
I'm
any
any
thoughts
on
that.
I'm
not
sure
we
have
a
consensus.
C
I
apologize
if
there's
any
background
noise.
Somehow
I
said
I'm
traveling
with
my
family
right
now,
so
I
would
just
say
I
think
my
concern
in
regulating
the
parking
is
we're
not
going
to
account
for
every
situation
right,
like
mr
buffard
had
a
great
example
of
where
there's
street
parking
readily
available,
where
he
is,
but
he
would
still
have
to
add
more.
So
I
think
I
I
like
the
idea
of
not
regulating
it
and
making
sure
I
mean
developers
are
going
to
build
where
they're
going
to
make
money
right.
C
A
No,
that
was
it.
Those
last
two
were
just
informational,
and
so
I
guess
our
recommendation
would
be
to
continue
the
public
hearing
to
a
date
uncertain
and,
and
we
will
endeavor
to
bring
it
back
as
as
soon
as
possible.
Right
now,
our
september
calendar
is
looking
pretty
packed,
so
I
think
it's
unlikely
that
we'd
come
back
earlier
than
october,
but
we'd
try
to
we
don't.
J
B
K
Thank
you.
I
don't
think
I
got
a
chance
to
mention
my
proposal
because
we're
at
the
end
of
the
hearing-
we
all
know-
I
don't
know
if
we
all
the
city
of
spokane
two
days
ago,
made
some
for
some
historic
missing
middle
code
changes
and
they
put
in
place
a
one-year
pilot
program
and
it's
made
a
lot
of
news
and
I
would
propose
we
have
the
momentum
right
now
we
were
planning
on
bringing
this
to
council.
It's
almost
done.
K
We
have
a
housing
emergency,
it's
a
house
on
fire,
a
hair
on
fire
housing
emergency.
I
would
propose
that
we
continue
this
by
doing
a
putting
this
in
into
a
one
year
proposal
a
one
year
pilot
program
while
doing
all
the
work.
I
love
the
equity
work,
the
grant
it's
such
a
total
score.
I
would
love
to
see
all
that
research
done
but
another
year
of
waiting
to
I
mean
it
takes
a
year
to
design
and
entitle
the
fastest
smallest
project.
The
bigger
projects
take
two
to
five
years.
K
We
just
don't
have
time
to
wait
and
we
all
have
I'll.
Have
this
almost
done?
It's
not
that
hard
for
us
to
go
back
and
tweak
things
when
we
get
more
feedback.
Oh,
this
is
a
bad
idea.
This
needs
to
be
tweaked
whatever
we
could
do
that
in
spring.
So,
let's
be
like
spokane
they're
they've
become
leaders.
Let's
do
it
one
year
pilot
and
get
this
get.
This
going.
Momentum
is
hard
to
take
it
going
again.
F
Sarah
gustafson
here
I
tend
to
agree
with
commissioner
westerbeck
on
the
urgency,
at
least
on
the
parking
issue.
I
think
we
need
to
hash
it
out
and
get
an
answer,
because
at
least
some
of
this
needs
to
start
moving
forward,
and
I
could
be
convinced
otherwise,
but
I
think
we
should
at
least
discuss
whether
we're
going
to
push
it
aside
for
another
few
months.
B
D
D
A
To
I
can
meet
with
the
september,
like
I
said,
the
september
calendar
is
is
full.
So
if
you
wanted
to
continue
to
a
date
certain,
I
would
say,
the
earliest
date
would
be
october
5th
and
the
the
reason
we're
suggesting
a
data
uncertainties,
because
we
we
need
to.
I
mean
we're
dealing
with
staffing,
changes
and
and
shortages
and
and
and
other
factors
that
have
really
made
it
hard
to
to
move
forward.
A
On
some
of
these
things
we're
pushing
as
hard
as
we
can,
and
we
have
no
interest
in
delaying
this
longer
than
we
have
to.
But
we
we
we
need
a
little
bit
of
time
to
to
consider
this
new
grant
and
and
how
how
we
might
move
forward,
and
we
can
look
at
at
a
pilot
program
approach
going
with
what
we've
got
now
ahead.
J
G
I
can
add
to
to
dave's
suggestion.
I
think
one
of
the
things
that
we
can
do
in
the
next
two
months,
too
is
talk
to
our
legal
team,
about
what
a
interim
ordinance
would
look
like,
and
that
might
give
us
some
opportunity
too,
that
in
october
we
if
we
do
decide
to
move
forward
with
something
like
a
one-year
pilot
or
an
interim
ordinance
that
we've
done
the
legal
work
on
it,
so
that
that
could
be
done
sooner
than
than
having
more
conversation
about
it
and
then
not
being
able
to
move
forward.
G
So
that's
one
suggestion
and
something
I
think
we
could
do
in
the
next
two
months
and
then
we
can
also
bring
you
all,
send
you
all
that
grant
proposal
and
then
maybe
kind
of
figure
out
a
work
plan
to
finish
this
piece
of
the
the
first
grant
to
give
some
security.
As
to
you
know,
we
don't
want
to
let
this
languish
and
there's
just
been
some
things
outside
of
our
control
too.
With
staffing
like
like
planar
boyd,
said
that
has
caused
some
complication
on
getting
this
completely
finished.
G
B
B
Okay,
so
it's
removed
and
seconded
that
we
amend
the
motion
to
continue
the
hearing
to
to
october
with
a
recommendation.
We
continue
some
interim
actions
to
make
these
changes
effective
as
soon
as
possible,
set
a
fair
summary
of
your
motion
sufficient
for
me
all
right,
so
all
in
favor
so
dave
do
you
have
that
motion
clear
enough.
A
I
do
I
I
guess
I
would
just
say
that
if
it's
it's
either
a
date
surgeon
or
it's
not
a
date
certain.
So
unless
deputy
director
winchell
thinks
we
should
push
it
to
the
the
third
wednesday
in
october.
I
would
recommend
that
we
could
bring
something
back
to
you
on
october
5th
and
try
to
try
to
have
something
that
we
can,
that
the
commission
can
forward
to
council
with
the
recommendation.
E
B
B
B
B
A
A
And
conditioning
additional
reductions
with
parking
study
and
and
in
considering
affordable
housing
provisions.
So
the
previous
map
showed
the
quarter
and
a
half
mile
radii
around
the
stops
that
meet
the
state
requirement
for
football
transit.
And
then
this
shows
the
stops
that
report
that
qualify
for
the
areas
that
qualify
for
parking
reductions
under
our
previous.
H
A
A
And
then
we've
heard
from
from
the
commission
that
they
would
like
to
apply
these
parking
reductions
not
just
to
existing
but
to
a
future
transit,
including
areas
where
we
would
like
would
hope
to
get
better
transit
in
the
future.
And
fourthly,
those
areas
that
are
neighborhood
activity,
centers
already
do
have
bus
service,
so
they
qualify.
A
H
K
A
A
So
the
changes
in
the
packet
are
not.
There
are
major
changes
in
the
findings.
There
was
a
recommendation
last
time
that
we
that
the
finding
that
promotes
parking
management
strategy
that
be
changed
to
transportation
management,
not
just
parking,
including,
what's
described
in
the
downtown
suburb
plan
for
parking.
A
Management
plan
and
transportation
demand
management
canyon
park,
so
that's
been
added
and
as
well
as
there
was
suggested,
to
add
to
the
recommendation
that
that
the
city
expand
tools,
consider
expanding
tools
like
the
king
county
right
size,
parking
calculator
that
they
not
only
consider
expanding
it
but
fund
that
work.
So
those
have
been
added
to
the
proposed
findings.
J
A
So
at
the
last
hearing
at
least
three
commissioners
come
supported
and
and
last
time
around,
we
provided
two
options:
one
where
that
third
tier
would
still
have
a
minimum
parking
requirement.
But
there
was
at
least
three
commissioners
that
wanted
to
have
no
flow
their
floor
there
and
and
and
to
have
the
parking
requirement
based
on
the
parking
study
and
then
a
variable
affordability
requirement
that
would
be
calculated
on
a
project
by
project
basis.
So
I.
F
J
A
There
there
would
be
the
the
variable
requirement
requirement,
but
as
the
memo
identified,
the
it
include
the
memo
included
a
table
with
some
draft
affordability
levels,
but
it
noted
that
they
didn't
include
the
shared
benefit
analysis
and
would
need
to
be
modified
and,
and
we're
still,
I'm
afraid,
we're
still
not
ready
with
a
final
proposal
for
you
to
include
in
a
recommendation.
So
once
again
we
are
recommending
a
motion
to
continue
the
hearing
to
september
21st.
We
don't
think
it
will
need
that.
We'll
need
a
lot
of
time.
A
A
K
Thank
you
dave,
I'm
going
to
jump
back
in
the
packet
a
little
bit.
I
was
reading
through
the
other
day
and
on
page
32
there's
a
table,
I'm
not
sure.
If
it's
actually
part
of
the
code,
the
park,
kid
reduction
stalls
per
unit.
Do
you
know
the
table?
It
says
it's
kind
of
a
flowchart.
Will
the
project
provide
affordable
housing
through
land
use
regulations
and
it
says
point
every
0.05?
K
A
K
A
K
Oh,
so
it
is
okay
got
it,
so
it
actually
got
it.
Okay,
all
right,
I
think
our
parking
code,
all
throughout
the
code
could
be
so
much
simpler,
but
I
do
this
really.
I
you
know
calculate
parking
for
part
of
my
job
and
this
has
been
really
hard
to
decipher
this
whole
section
and
all
the
all
the.
If
this,
then
this
and
percentages
changes,
and
if
you
do
this
much
affordable
housing-
I
I
don't
know,
I
think
it
would
be
there's
already
so
much
bloat
like
when
we
go
permit
a
project.
K
It
takes
an
enormous
amount
of
time
and
we,
you
know,
we
need
more
consultants
and
and
fee
and
everything
than
ever
it
takes
you
guys
longer
to
review
it.
Understandably,
so
I
don't
know,
I
don't
want
to
throw
a
monkey
wrench
in
this,
but
man
we
could
sure
simplify
this
make
it
a
lot
easier
to
decipher
feels
like
you
should
be
able
to
jump
in
the
code.
Look
at
a
table
say
you
know,
here's
a
few
exceptions
you
can
get.
K
You
know
some
simple
chop
offs
of
reductions
of
parking,
if
you,
if
you
put
in
some
affordable
housing
and
that's
really
easy
to
understand-
and
we
just
keep
it,
keep
it
simple,
and
I
don't
actually
have
a
super
thought
through
suggestion
right
now,
because
I
was
just
trying
to
understand
it
at
first,
but
I
always
be
willing
to
brainstorm
what
would
be
more
understandable,
but
I
understand
a
lot
of
work's
been
done.
I
don't
want
to
just
throw
it
in
the
recycling
bin,
but
those
are
my
comments
at
the
moment.
A
K
Yeah,
you
know,
I'm
gonna
go
there
because
I
feel
like
man,
we
need.
We
need
housing
period,
but
we
really
need
affordable
housing.
We
should
just
say
it's
optional.
Go
build.
Some
housing
go,
get
her
done
like
we're,
not
gonna.
We're,
not
gonna
hinder
you
anymore.
A
lot
of
people
who
are
in
you
know,
lower
lower
ami
housing,
don't
even
drive,
they
can't
afford
a
car.
So
I
don't
know,
but
I'd
like
a
broken
record
on
that
I
know.
Thank
you.
B
A
H
A
R
Oh
well,
on
parking
in
general,
I
basically
can
say
that
I'm
really
against
street
parking
kind
of.
Overall
I
do
find
the
the
councilman's
comment
about.
If
you're
poor,
you
don't
have
a
car
kind
of
comical,
because
when
I
was
poor,
I
had
two
because
I
had
to
make
certain
that
I
had
one
that
ran
and
got
me
to
work.
R
So
it's
not
that
you
have
one
car
per
person
that
you
have
two
cars
per
person.
If
you
don't
have
the
money
to
go
and
afford
to
go
in
to
be
living
in
a
house,
so
there's
a
all
sorts
of
things
on
that.
So
you
know
when
it
comes
to
the
the
parking
of
vehicles
like
I've
mentioned
to
you
before
previously
today
I
would
go
and
I'd
make
it
so
it's
required
to
be
on
property
somewhere,
where
it's
you
know
kept
safe
and
out
of
the
public
high.
R
A
B
B
A
A
J
J
S
J
S
Okay,
all
right
well
good
evening.
Commissioners,
my
name
is
sherman
gong,
I'm
the
city,
transportation,
planner
and
with
me
is
steve.
Markawa,
the
capital
division
manager,
and
we
do
have
a
lot
of
information
that
we
would
like
to
share
with
you
tonight
so
just
to
get
started,
since
we
only
have
45
minutes
to
start
our
study
session
for
the
bottle
bike
plan.
S
S
S
In
other
words,
don't
build
a
section
here
and
there
just
try
to
build
a
continuous,
improved
crossings
over
I-405.
That
includes
the
i9,
the
195th
interchange,
as
well
as
527.,
consider
traffic
calming
to
slow
down
vehicle
traffic,
use
of
traffic,
calming
measures
neighborhoods
and
such
and
the
need
for
education
enforcement
way,
finding
bike,
storage
and
maintenance.
S
S
S
The
network
facilities
we
proposed
for
the
ultimate
vision
included
standard
bike
lanes.
What
you
mainly
see
on
our
existing
bike
routes
today,
buffered
bike
lanes,
which
include
a
two
foot
buffer
stripe
between
the
travel,
the
the
vehicle,
travel
away
and
bike
lanes
and
then
protected
or
separated
bike
lanes,
which
locates
the
bike
lane
at
sidewalk
level
between
the
sidewalk
and
landscape
strip,
and
provides
a
physical
buffer
between
bikes
and
and
vehicles.
S
S
So,
besides
the
protected
bike
lanes,
we
also
heard
a
strong
desire
for
designated
routes
through
downtown
bothell.
This
figure
depicts
our
recommendation
for
routing
through
downtown,
which
is
really
the
downtown
core
outlined
in
the
red
boxed
area.
Only
the
streets,
colored
green,
represents
streets
with
protected
bike
lane
facilities,
while
the
yellow
colored
streets
represent
streets
that
would
remain
as
cheryl
marked
facilities.
S
Converting
the
cheryl
mark
streets
into
protected
bike
lanes
would
have
a
significant
economic
impact
to
our
local
businesses,
mainly
due
to
the
removal
of
parking
which
would
be
required
and
which
is
a
premium
downtown
in
the
downtown
core,
and
so
it's
not
recommended
downtown
streets
are
also
very
narrow.
So
trying
to
build
bike
lanes
would
likely
impact
sidewalks
and
pedestrian
accessibility,
which
is
a
primary
objective
for
downtown
bothell.
S
S
A
consideration,
though
we
would
like
to
share
with
you,
is
the
use
of
road
dieting
to
create
the
space
for
bike
facilities.
There's
not
a
lot
of
opportunities
to
expand
the
bike
network.
This
way
in
bothell,
but
the
two
locations
of
north
creek
parkway
and
the
29th
drive
26
avenue
corridors
come
to
mind.
J
S
S
The
other
impact
has
to
do
with
safety,
protected
bike
lanes,
put
riders
behind
trees
and
vegetation,
which
will
block
them
from
the
driver's
view.
This
is
particularly
the
issue
at
driveways
and
intersections
where
drivers
do
not
see
adjacent
bike
riders
when
making
the
right
turn
movements
the
result
of
this
blind
spot.
If
you
will
is
sort
of
like
in
that
upper
picture,
if
you're
traveling
along
and
you're
ready
to
make
a
right
turn,
you
may
not
see
the
the
bike
rider
following
up
adjacent
to
you.
S
Result
of
that
blind
spot
is
that
it
feels
you
know
that
there
are
generally
a
higher
number
of
crash
incidents
because
of
that,
but
they
are
lower
severity
than
in
street
bike.
Lane
crashes
also
engineering
guidelines
suggest
that
moving
bike
lanes
closer
to
the
street
or
the
travel
lanes
at
intersections
and
and
or
driveways,
and
have
them
clear
of
vegetation
to
allow
for
better
visibility
by
both
riders
and
drivers.
K
I
know,
there's
been
a
lot
of
you-
know:
creative
engineering,
around
protected
bike
lanes
and
and
integrating
bikes
into
cities
this
tool
design.
Maybe
they've
already
commented
on
it
that
the
suggestions
you
had
for
making
those
safer
do
they
already
have
some
some
ideas
in
mind
for
making
those
intersections
safer.
So
there
are
fewer
collisions
where
the
protected
bike
lanes,
you
know
meet
corners
and
intersections.
S
K
S
S
S
B
J
Q
Q
I
noticed
that,
and
then
you
mentioned
in
the
beginning
that
you
didn't
get
a
lot
of
support
for
any
form
of
bike
lane,
except
for
a
protected
bike
lane,
and
so
you
made
those
adjustments
in
your
drive,
which
I
think
is
awesome,
but
I'm
also
wondering-
and
certainly
in
your
revised
draft-
it's
not
as
it
doesn't
cover
as
much
because
of
the
downtown
area,
because
protected
bike
lanes
take
a
lot
more
investment.
I
would
imagine
knowing
when
you
phrased
the
questions
to
the
public.
Q
Did
you
I'm
wondering
if
considering
we
could
have
a
bike
lane
here
or
nothing
at
all?
You
know
if
they
would
go
for?
Oh,
I
would
prefer
mixed
up
protected
and
more
exposed
bike
lanes
and
get
greater
coverage
as
opposed
to
less
coverage
with
protected
bike
lanes.
So
I
think
my
ultimately,
my
question
is:
how
were
those
questions
phrased
towards
the
public
and
how
did
that?
S
So
we
hadn't,
we
didn't
reduce
the
coverage
at
all.
We
just
changed
certain
facilities
that
are
either
were
intended
to
be
bike
lanes
or
buffered
bike
lanes
to
be
protected
bike
lanes,
but
the
network
didn't
shrink
it's
going
to
cost
more,
but
that's
that's
a
discussion
for
another
time.
We
just
want
to
focus
on
making
sure
that
at
this
point
in
time,
we
are
all
in
agreement
that
we
can
move
forward
with
the
vision
which
is
to
have
a
protected
bike
lane
network,
basically
on
all
of
our.
D
Thanks
this
is
carsten.
Thank
you
for
listening
to
the
feedback
of
the
commission
and
the
public.
I
know
it
seems
like
it
might
be
impractical
or
it
might.
You
know
the
planning
process
isn't
fully
fleshed
out,
but
this
is
really
more
aligned
with
the
vision
that
we
were
going
for
for
all
ages
and
abilities
to
be
able
to
use
the
facilities
and
get
through
our
city.
However,
they
need
to
I.
D
D
This
is
an
opportunity
to
really
I
mean
we're
planning
from
the
ground
up
so
use
it
really
become
familiar
with
that
and
the
last
and
final
challenge
I
would
offer
would
be
to
get
out
and
bike
in
our
city.
I
would
love
to
do
a
lunchtime
bike
ride
if
you're
ever
in
bothell,
I
would
happily
take
a
a
lunch
time
off
and
and
ride
around
just
so
that
we
can
see.
You
know
what
the
facilities
look
like
in
real
life
and
what
the
vision
is
and
really
get
on
board
with.
D
D
C
J
C
We
are
gonna,
get
a
roundabout
and
I
am
terrified.
That's
where
I
walk
and
bike
to
get
my
kid
to
school,
and
I
you
know
walking
in
and
biking
in
woodenville
around
their
roundabouts
in
wine
country
off
the
trail
horrifying
because
at
the
four-way
stop
that's
there
now
cars
happen
at
roundabouts.
They
just
keep
going
and
you're
on
a
bike
and
half
the
time.
My
kid
is
on
the
back
of
my
bike
and
it's
it's
terrifying
I'll
own,
my
harley-davidson
e-bike.
C
So
you
can
feel
cool
and
and
let's
go
because
it's
that
roundabout
really
scares
me
so
anything
we
can
do
to
make
a
safer
version
in
bothell.
If
we
have
to
have
the
roundabout
there
would
be
amazing.
So
I
really
appreciate
that
he
brought
that
up
because
I
had
forgotten
and
then
I
went
and
then
he
said
roundabout
and
I
was
like
oh
right,
the
terrifying
roundabout,
that's
going
right
by
my
house.
So
it's
a
it's
a
big
concern
of
mine.
S
So
that
the
roundabouts
are
great
for
capacity,
you
know
that's
what
the
purpose
of
them
are:
they're
to
increase
traffic
flow,
better
than
stop
lights
and
stuff,
that's
kind
of
the
main
purpose
of
why
they're
basically
incorporated,
but
you
know,
hopefully
we
can
maybe
look
at
other
routes.
You
know
it's
not
like.
We
have
to
route
everything
through
a
roundabout.
You
know
for
bikes
there's.
Ideally
we
try
to
stay
away
from.
S
You
know
major
intersections,
so
to
speak,
and
that's
kind
of
you
know
where
those
roundabouts
generally
go
or
is
where
you
know
you
have
a
higher
volume
of
traffic
you're
trying
to
push
it
through
an
intersection.
So
you
know
we
could
try
to
look
good,
try
to
look
for
alternative
routes.
You
know
that
you
know
would
offer
a
more
comfortable
ride
for
people.
You
know
that's.
That
would
be
an
alternative
way
to
look
at
it.
C
Yeah
totally,
I
think
where
I'm
at
near,
where
second
turns
into
231st
it's
an
l-shaped
road,
my
choices
are
228th
or
240th
or
meridian
or
buffalo
highways,
so
they're
all
busy
traffic
roads.
We
don't
have
a
lot
of
through
roads
there.
So,
whatever
alternative
pass,
you
can
offer
us.
I
would
happily.
F
Hi
sarah
gustafson
here
thanks
sherman
for
getting
us
a
bigger
and
better
bike
plan.
Sorry
transportation,
planner
going,
and
I
really
like
your
hand-drawn
illustrations.
Those
are
awesome.
I
do
have
to
wonder.
I
love
seeing
protected
routes
more
places.
I
do
have
to
ask:
how
much
will
this
change
cost
compared
to
the
first
version
like
what
is
the
ballpark
we're
talking
about
adding
and
how
much
of
that
do?
S
Yeah,
if
you're,
you
know,
if
you're,
if
you
think
the
vision
is
kind
of
where
we're
going
is,
is
the
right
way
to
go
and
you're
on
board.
With
this
vision,
we
can
we're
going
to
be
talking
about
a
lot
about
the
timing
and
implementation
in
the
next
few
meetings
from
a
cost
standpoint.
Yeah,
it's
going
to
cost
more.
It
will
because
it's
cost
more.
It
takes
more
time
because
we
don't
have
you
know
you
know
oodles
of
money,
bundles
of
money
to
just
spread
around
so.
S
I
can't
I
can't
tell
you
how
long
you
know
or
what
you
know
what
the
timing
would
be
right
now,
but
we'll
we'll
address
some
of
those
kind
of
things
in
our
in
our
next
meetings
with
you
guys
because
there's
you
know,
it's
all
a
function
of
you
know
of
how
well
projects
compete
and
everything
like
that.
It's
it's
a
whole
nother
array.
I
don't
want
to
get
into
that
right
now,
so
good
questions,
but
I
it
would
take
all
night
to
get
into
those
to
get
to
answer
that
question.
For
you
honestly.
K
Thank
you,
commissioner.
Westerbeck
here.
Thank
you,
transportation,
planner
gong.
This
is
great.
I
like,
like
other
commissioners.
I
love
the
reiteration
of
this
plan
this
this
update
and
that
we're
being
more
bold
and
ambitious
because,
as
you've
seen
and
people
have
expressed,
they
just
don't
feel
safe.
Unless
there's
you
know
somewhat
protected
from
being
mowed
down
by
a
car,
and
we
see
that
around
the
world
anyway.
I
want
to
applaud
you.
This
is
really
great
and
a
big
improvement.
I'm
curious,
I
know
budget's
always
an
issue.
K
We
have
really
pretty
big
right-of-ways
and
a
lot
lots
of
bothell
streets
and
I'm
thinking,
for
example,
just
as
an
example
right
out
here
between
on
bui
beardsley
boulevard
between
the
uw
bothell
campus
and
downtown.
It's
a
really
huge
right
of
way
and
granted
there's
parking
there
that
gets
used
and
everything,
but
even
with
the
parking,
I
wonder
if
there's
room
for
restriping
and
then
you're
putting
down
a
bolt
down
bollards
or
something
like
you
know,
jersey,
barrier
or
something
like
that.
I
see
that
being
done.
K
Another
transportation
planners-
and
I
brought
this
up
before
jeff
speck
who's
well
known
for
his
work
around
making,
walking
and
biking
around
city
safer.
He
recommends
that
the
low-hanging
fruit
when
you've
got
right-of-way
is
make
10-foot
lanes.
I
know
bothell
has
12
mandated
in
our
code
whatever,
so
we
may
need
to
look
at
that.
K
Maybe
there
isn't
a
sidewalk,
but
we've
got
50
60,
maybe
75
or
even
80
feet
of
right
away,
and
I
can
find
I
live
on
98th
or
here
in
downtown,
and
we
have
a
turn
lane
and
it's
virtually
never
used,
except
for
trucks
to
drop
drop
things
off.
They
need
a
place
like
the
amazon
trucks
to
park.
We
have
like
huge
amounts
of
right-of-way,
that's
kind
of
unused,
because
the
turn
lane
isn't
really
really
necessary.
It's
not
a
busy
busy
street
that
way.
K
So
I
just
can't
help
every
time
I'm
riding
or
driving
around
bothell
thinking.
We
could
probably
repurpose
our
huge
right-of-ways
and
restripe
them.
I
know
striping
and
paint
costs
money.
I
know
bollards
cost
money,
but
it
seems
like
a
first,
a
first
pass
and
you
know
quickly
a
capital
project
that,
maybe
would
be
you
know,
a
few
million
or
something
like
I
don't
know
what
the
price
would
be
versus
millions
and
millions
and
needing
federal
monies
or
state
monies.
K
You
could
say
all
right:
we're
gonna
we're
gonna,
repurpose
and
restripe
right
away
and
I
think,
a
great
place
to
start.
For
example,
I'm
shocked,
I'm
shocked.
We
haven't
done
it
after
23
years
of
having
the
utah
buffalo
campus
there
that
we
haven't
placed
together,
beardsley
and
downtown
with
a
protective
bike
lane
in
both
directions
and
some
kermit,
some
green
paint-
and
I
mean
it's
an
economic
and
financial
opportunity
for
the
city
as
well.
To
connect
the
city,
the
campus
to
downtown
and
that'd
be
a
great
pilot
project.
K
S
S
K
S
K
It's
okay,
I
think
the
neck
yeah.
I
just
watched
that
walk
that
a
few
days
ago,
the
the
valley
view
by
the
cemetery
and
everything
yeah.
So
there's
you
know
huge
opportunity
there.
If
we
could
get
it
done
on
beardsley,
but
boy
that
should
be
part
of
the
bike
plan.
We
do
right
away
connecting
downtown
the
campus.
That
seems
like
a
missed
opportunity.
S
K
You
well
knows:
well
you,
when
you
jump
across
immediately
off
of
from
the
intersection
of
main
street
on
to
valley
view,
there's
100
yards
200
yards,
where
there's
no
sidewalk
or
any,
when
you're
walking,
you're
literally
walking
next
to
cars
in
the
street.
So
you
know
yeah
low
hanging
fruit
right
there
as
well,
but
I
I
digress
as
well
so
appreciate
it
appreciate
the
work.
S
T
Sure
so,
like
sherman
said,
I
think
implementation
implementation
is
the
tough
part,
but
we
did
want
to
get
the
vision
set.
We
will
talk
about
things
like
cost
and
opportunities
for
real
diets,
and
we
want
to
talk
to
you
about
what
it
takes
to
do
certain
things.
I
would
like
to
talk
about
beardsley
a
little
bit,
so
beersly
will
be
the
transit
corridor.
T
It
currently
is
sound.
Transit,
king
county
metro
and
community
transit
have
been
working
with
the
city
as
well
with
uwato
and
cascadia
college,
and
you
guys
know
that
the
husky
village
is
being
rebuilt
right
now,
so
they're
frontage,
actually
that's
going
to
be,
unfortunately,
a
five-lane
road
and
it
has
to
be
there's
just
so
many
cars
there.
The
buses
are
actually
going
to
stop
in
the
outside
lane.
T
So
the
five
lanes
allows
us
to
let
the
buses
stop
in
line
there,
but
on
the
husky
village
side
there
will
be
a
cycle
track
on
top
of
the
curb
behind
the
bus.
Stop.
So
that's
where
the
bike
facility
will
be
so
that
they
will
be
outside
of
the
the
buses
driving
through,
and
I
think
we
even
tried
to
get
some
layout
on
the
north
side
or
beardsley
between
campus
entrance
and
the
fire
station.
Because
the
vision
there
would
be
to
put
a
protected
bike
lane
on
that
site
as
well.
B
So
I
have
a
couple
of
thoughts.
Everything
karsten
said,
commissioner
kurds
said
about
the
405
bottle
ever
way.
Crossing
applies
at
195th,
you've
got
vehicles
there
that
are
either
accelerating
to
freeway
speed
or
coming
off
the
freeway
rather
quickly
and
I've
ridden
that
many
times
and
you're
crossing
traffic
with
them.
So
I
I
think
we
all
know
it's
a
challenge.
It
involves
other
agencies,
but
getting
from
that
north
creek
trail
over
downtown
takes
you
over
that
crossing
and
that's
challenging.
B
Also,
commissioner
dodd's
comment
on
circles
as
transportation
planner
gong
indicated
circles
are
great
for
increasing
capacity,
increasing
the
speed
of
flow
through,
all
of
which
make
it
more
challenging
for
bicycles,
so
yeah.
If
there's
a
way
to
get
around
those
that'd
be
great
rolling
bicycles
through
there,
you
are
putting
slower
bicycle
traffic
crossing
lanes
that
you
have
just
deliberately
speeded
up,
so
that
that
does
raise
concern
on
a
lot
of
our
parts,
and
I
guess
the
final
thing
I'd
say
is
where
we
can
do
interim
things.
I
think
we
should
consider
it.
B
S
I'd
just
like
to
respond
to
that
sure,
commissioner,
that
the
you
know
crossings
we
just
so
everybody's
aware
the
crossings,
but
over
the
195th
interchange
is
going
to
be
there's
a
end
up
in
the
design
already
in
by
washdot,
because
they're
going
to
have
inline
bus
stops
on
both
sides
for
sound
transit
and
so
to
do
to
get
people
to
those
buses
they're
going
to
ultimately
have
a
new
pedestrian
crossing.
So
that's
going
to
happen
on
195th
again,
it's
timing,
you're
right,
it's
gonna,
be
involves.
S
It
involves
other
agencies
the
same
with
the
crossing
over
527
there's
already.
The
plan
is
already
in
place
to
cross.
You
know
from
the
middle
of
the
freeway
into
the
canyon
park
business
park
and
we're
pushing
really
hard
still
to
you
know,
have
them
plan
and
design
the
portion
that
comes
to
the
south
side
into
you
know
the
pcc
parking
lot
or
15th
on
kind
of
kind
of
over
in
this
direction.
The
south
direction.
So
you
know
it's.
S
Ready
to
you
know
we're
just
hoping
that
they
keep
on
moving
ahead
with
that,
and
you
know
I
don't
know.
As
far
as
you
comment
about
roundabouts,
I
think
you
know.
Traffic
speeds
through
roundabouts
are
generally
supposed
to
be
slower.
That's
what
they're
meant
to
do
is
slow
people
down
you're
right.
They
don't
come
to
a
complete,
stop.
S
You
know
which
makes
it
you
know,
ready,
I'm
ready
to
cross,
or
is
this
guy
going
to
get
me
you
know
so
they
are,
they
do
slow
traffic
down,
but
they
slow
them
down
fast
more
than
like
just
leaving
them
going.
Let
them
go
straight
one
way
or
another.
So
you
know
it's
kind
of
what
you
know.
Potato
potato.
B
A
R
Yeah
excellent
matt
carter
I
go
and
I
live
in
bothell
just
north
of
190th
and
I
can
go
and
say
I'm
really
quite
happy
to
go
and
see
that
there's
a
bicycling
plan
going
on
here,
because,
along
with
having
to
go
and
have
the
two
cars
to
make
certain,
I
can
get
to
my
job,
but
I
didn't
have
much
money.
I
also
had
my
bicycle,
which
I
wrote
all
the
way
to
seattle
on
the
bart
gilman,
so
improvement
on
trails
be
great.
The
concern
I
have,
though,
is
I
know,
140th.
R
R
R
Yeah,
definitely
because
if
you
don't
have
the
pedestrian
mobility
around
those
bike
lanes,
the
bike
lanes
are
just
going
to
go
and
to
be
you
know,
used
by
the
families
and
such
because
it's
a
fire
smooth
their
surface.
It's
easy
to
get
access,
which
is
why
the
the
shared
use.
I
think
it
actually
might
be
a
better
plan,
for
you
know
closer
towards
that
downtown
area
where
you're
going
to
have
more
pedestrian
load.
E
I
hadn't
thought
about
the
comments
that
mr
carter
made,
but
he's
probably
seen
me
walking
in
that
bike
lane
now
that
I
think
about
it,
because
I'm
always
there
and
I'm
always
dodging
cars
with
my
dogs,
because
the
sidewalk
is
it's
not
only
narrow,
but
it
stops
at
a
certain
point
and
I
don't
want
to
be
on
the
other
side
of
the
road
because
there's
a
very
narrow
lane
and
if
people
are
passing,
my
dog
is
going
crazy.
So
he's
he's
absolutely
right
and
he's
probably
dodged
me
a
time
or
two.
B
S
B
G
So
we
are
we're
working
on
scheduling,
out
planning
commission
for
the
rest
of
the
year
and
figuring
out
what
projects
we're
still
working
on
and
what
dates
we
hope
to
bring
those
to
planning
commission.
The
other
thing
that
I
think
would
be
worth
noting
is
we
have
received
this
week
three
grant
awards.
We
have
a
award
for
the
middle
housing,
so
that's
120
000,
which
senior
planner
boyd
discussed
in
his
presentation.
We
received
an
80
000
grant
for
climate
change
work,
so
we
can.
We
can
provide
you
with
both
of
those
applications.
G
I
noted
that
we
put
the
schedule
for
september
and
beyond
which
we
only
have
july
in
here,
so
we
apologize
for
that,
but
we
are
planning
on
bringing
so
the
tdr
pro
program
is
we're
working
with
burke
on
that.
So
we
hope
to
have
that
ready
for
you
all
on
september,
7th
you'll
also
be
hearing
about
the
bike
plan
in
september,
and
then
the
parking
reductions
will
also
be
coming
and
then
I
believe,
there's
a
landmark
preservation
code.
G
G
D
It's
me
the
report.
Remember
I
want
to
recognize
all
the
great
work
that
went
into
the
fourth
of
july
celebration
and
again
with
parties
in
the
streets
which
are
amazing,
so
friday's
in
downtown
bothell
is
already
shaping
up
to
be
a
great
success
and
activating
the
space
that
we've
so
carefully
planned.
D
C
Yeah
same
difference
right
so
that
would
be
awesome
and
if
you
need
help
planning
happy
to
help
form
a
subcommittee,
if
that
would
be
of
assistance-
and
I
think
it'd
be
great-
I
think
we
only
had
a
couple
of
council
members
present
last
time-
maybe
just
the
mayor,
I'm
not
sure,
so
it
would
be
awesome
to
try
to
get
more
attendance
from
there
too.
If
that
is
something
that
maybe
staff
could
help
us
coordinate.
So
we
don't
break
quorum
rules
by
talking
to
multiple
people
about
the
same
thing.