►
From YouTube: Bothell Planning Commission Meeting - November 16, 2022
Description
0:03:25 - Public Comments
0:04:10 - Approval of Minutes
0:05:00 - New Business
0:06:10 - Public Hearing: Canyon Park Transfer of Development Rights (continued)
0:51:50 - Public Hearing: Bike Plan (continued)
1:55:35 - Unfinished Business
2:08:10 - Reports from Staff
2:20:10 - Reports from Members
A
A
Before
we
move
on
to
the
agenda
items
I'd
like
to
acknowledge
our
hybrid
meeting
format,
the
city
of
Bothell
is
providing
an
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
for
use
to
ensure
compliance
with
the
open
public
meetings
Act.
We
have
a
public
comment
agenda
item
at
the
beginning
of
the
meeting.
This
is
time
for
issues
not
on
tonight's
agenda.
Please
limit
these
comments
to
three
minutes.
A
Public
comment
and
hearing
testimony
will
be
allowed
both
in
person
and
Via
zoom,
and
those
wishing
to
comment
by
a
zoom
are
asked
to
submit
an
online
form
by
3
pm.
Today,
people
wishing
to
submit
written
comments
were
encouraged
to
submit
those
comments
or
also
requested
to
submit
those
comments
by
3
pm.
A
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
and
callers
during
staff.
Presentation
staff
will
make
every
effort
to
specify
which
materials
they're
referencing,
so
everyone
can
make,
can
follow
along.
A
A
A
Lastly,
before
I
begin
I'd
like
to
reiterates
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,
and
if
you
are
also
streaming
the
live.
Video
feed.
Please
turn
off
the
sound
as
there
is
a
delay
at
specific
breaks
in
the
presentation.
I'll
be
calling
on
members
who
wish
to
speak
or
ask
a
question,
and
if
you
want
to
speak,
please
indicate
this
by
raising
your
hand,
I
will
call
on
you
as
soon
as
I
see
you.
A
A
The
first
item
on
the
agenda
is
public
comment.
The
city
has
accepted
visitor
comment
in
writing,
as
well
as
accepted
sign
up
sheets
for
those
who
wish
to
speak
at
tonight's
meeting,
though
I
see
none
written
comments
submitted
to
staff
no
later
than
3
pm
today,
we're
forwarded
to
all
Commissioners
and
are
part
of
the
record
as
well.
This
is
the
time
for
items
not
on
tonight's
agenda,
deputy
director
Winchell.
Do
we
have
any
individuals
wishing
to
comment?
No.
D
A
A
A
C
Thank
you,
hi
chair,
Kieran
and
Sarah
Gustafson
here,
I'd
like
to
add
or
suggest
an
item
for
the
agenda,
which
would
be
to
get
some
more
information
about
the
timeline
for
when
city
council
is
considering
the
missing
middle
housing
legislation
and
possibly
recommend
a
delegation
of
Planning
Commission
to
go
and
speak
to
city
council
when
that
time
arises.
What
is.
A
All
right
would
it
be
all
right
with
you.
If
we
handled
that
under
unfinished
business,
we
could
bring
it
up
as
an
item
there,
certainly,
and
if
the
commission
would
like
to
develop
a
motion.
Okay,
we
can
certainly
do
that
at
that
point
and
speak
to
the
Council
on
that
item,
which
has
been
before
us
for
quite
some
time.
Excellent.
A
D
Right
right,
Ashley,
Winchell,
Community,
the
deputy
community
development
director
chairman
and
members
of
the
Planning
Commission
tonight
we're
bringing
you
all
a
public
hearing
on
the
transfer
of
development
rights.
So
last
time
you
all
heard
this.
It
was
June
Nathan
was
the
person
presenting
it
to
you
and
I
think
we
all
know.
D
One,
you
know
make
a
recommendation
to
forward
to
counsel
with
some
potential
changes
that
may
happen
around
some
language
and
then
also
there
was
one
to
continue
to
December
7th,
to
allow
us
to
finalize
that
language.
We've
spoken
with
some
members
of
the
candy
in
park,
business,
Owners
Association.
D
Who
would
like
a
little
more
time
to
review
this,
and
so
we
would
actually
before
we
get
into
this,
just
want
to
recommend
that
we
continue
this
to
December
7th,
we
plan
on
meeting
with
them,
and
we
also
want
to
make
sure
that
our
Community
Partners
have
time
to
review
the
agenda.
That's
before
you
all
tonight,
so
of
course
the
Planning
Commission
can
can
make
whatever
recommendation
they
wish,
but
we
recommend
that
we
also
give
them
some
time.
It
is
I.
D
D
F
D
Right,
so
just
to
remind
you
of
what
the
project
scope
is
for
this.
Essentially,
the
city
of
Bothell
has
been
working
on
a
sub-area
plan
to
guide
development
in
the
Canyon
Park
regional
growth
Center.
It's
a
regional
growth
Center
is
a
designation
by
the
Puget
Sound
Regional,
Council
or
psrc,
and
it
has
different
criteria
or
framework
for
how
many
activity
units,
which
is
essentially
population
and
jobs
that
are
required
per
acre.
D
One
of
the
challenges
with
reaching
Target
activity
unit
units
in
Canyon
Park
will
be
the
incoming
Sound
Transit
bus,
Bay
North
site.
So,
of
course,
the
great
part
of
brt
is
we're
going
to
have
more
connectivity,
but
the
buses
have
to
be
stored
somewhere
and
maintained
somewhere
and
that's
happening
in
Canyon
Park
and
the
facility,
as
you
can
imagine,
isn't
necessarily
the
meeting
those
activity
units
and
so
in
order
for
us
to
maintain
the
activity
units
in
Canyon
Park.
D
It's
a
lower
density
of
employment
than
planned
for
the
neighborhood,
and
it
would
will
of
course,
challenge
the
ability
for
the
city
to
meet
these
density
goals
in
the
area
and
so
again
we're
proposing
that
transfer
of
development
rights
to
move
the
potential
floor
area
from
this
site
to
other
sites
in
in
the
the
sub
area,
and
so
it
sounds
simple,
but
there's
a
lot
of
things
that
go
into
figuring
out.
Where
can
we
move
these
units
without
causing
potential
Transportation
issues
or
or
other
items?
D
So
tonight
we're
going
to
talk
to
you
about
our
updated
phase,
one
report,
so
when
this
was
with
you
all
in
June,
we
had
originally
done
the
transportation
analysis
around
the
intersection
level
of
service
versus
Corridor
level
of
service
and
the
City
of
Bothell
uses
a
corridor
level
of
service.
But
we
of
course
use
some
of
the
information
from
the
intersection
level
of
service
to
inform
where
we
thought
would
be
appropriate
to
be
receiving
sites.
D
We
also
have
updated
code
language.
This
language
has
been
reviewed
by
Sound
Transit.
It's
also
been
reviewed
by
the
city
of
Bothell,
we're
still
working
out
some
minor
changes,
but
essentially
the
way
the
program
functions.
We
we
don't
anticipate
in
some
of
the
changes
we're
still
looking
at
that
the
program
would
function
any
differently,
it's
kind
of
getting
into
like.
Should
we
call
it
a
covenant
or
an
easement?
Should
we
call
it
a
parcel
or
a
lot
it's
getting
into
some
of
those
nitty-gritty
details
and
then
we'll
talk
a
little
bit
about
next
steps.
D
D
So
since
it's
been
a
while
just
wanted
to
remind
you
all
of
what
we've
we've
done
in
the
past
or
we
Nathan
and
me
I've
worked
on
so
before
I
was
here:
Nathan
met
with
the
development
services
Advisory
Group
to
talk
to
them
about
the
program.
There
were
study
sessions
on
this
on
February,
16th
and
May
4th.
The
first
public
hearing
was
June
1st.
We
had
a
very
brief
public
hearing
on
October
19th
or
up
I,
don't
even
know
if
we
could
call
it.
D
If
we
move
activity
from
here
to
here
is
what
does
that
do
to
our
transportation
Network,
and
where
can
we
make
sure
that
we
have
minimal
to
no
impact,
as
we
move
things
around
so
I'm
going
to
talk
to
you
all
about
each
of
the
scenarios
and
just
to
add
confusion
to
what's
already
a
kind
of
confusing
program?
We
have
blocks
that
are
numbered
and
then
scenarios
that
are
numbered,
but
the
numbers
don't
go
together,
so
we
could
have
changed
it
to
alphabet.
But
here
we
are
so.
Hopefully
this
map
helps
so
scenario.
D
D
We
reduced
trips
from
site
7,
which
is
the
bus,
Bay
North,
the
hatched
area
on
the
map
we
reduced
those
and
that
was
applied
to
all
four
of
the
scenarios
step
two
is
we
calculated
the
increase
in
trips
related
to
the
multi-family
units,
which
would
occur
at
various
locations
and
scenarios,
one
two
and
three
and
then
step
three.
We
calculated
an
increase
in
trips
to
the
office
site.
D
So
here's
here's
the
findings
from
that
traffic
analysis.
The
effects
of
Shifting
development
capacity
are
minor
in
part
due
to
the
reduced
number
of
peak
trips
anticipated
on
the
Sound
Transit
bus,
Bay,
North
site.
So
of
course,
since
we're
moving
trips
away,
that's
reducing
the
the
transportation
demand
in
that
area.
D
So
based
on
the
assessment,
many
of
the
changes
in
the
development
identified
in
these
scenarios
are
expected
to
have
only
small
effects
on
traffic
with
internal
roads
in
the
area
during
peak
hours.
This
suggests
that
no
additional
improvements
would
be
necessary
to
these
streets
due
to
the
shifts
in
development
from
the
transfer
development
rates
program,
and
then
the
final
finding
is
that
there
could
be
reductions
in
level
of
service
due
to
shifts
in
development
under
different
scenarios.
D
From
this
assessment,
the
analysis
shows
that
adding
more
commercial
buildings
to
superblock
5
would
result
in
more
significant
impacts
on
the
transportation
system
and
other
areas
make
better
receiving
sites,
given
the
lower
chance
of
Transportation
impacts
from
the
shifts
and
activities
and
uses.
So
this
is
all
really
important,
because
in
the
code
updates
that
we've
included
in
the
packet,
we
need
to
show
what's
a
sending
site
and
what's
a
receiving
site,
and
we
can't
have
a
code
that
tells
you
to
do
transfer
development
rates,
if
you
don't
know
where
you
can
put
it.
D
So
this
is
all
feeding
into
the
code.
Amendments
that
are
in
your
packet,
I
know
that
Nathan
went
through
these
with
you
all
and
so
I
just
wanted
to
give
an
overview
of
what
is
in
these
amendments
and
then,
when
we
get
to
questions
and
answers,
we
can
get
I
can
provide
feedback
on
more
specific
items
that
you
may
have
questions
about
from
our
code
amendments,
essentially
what
we're
looking
at
adding
in
the
code
a
purpose
of
the
program.
D
So
it's
always
great
when
we're
getting
into
a
code
of
another
planner
inherits
this
and
it's
like.
Why
did
we
even
do?
This
purpose
is
very
helpful
in
the
future,
for
intent,
definitions,
specific
to
the
transfer
of
development
rights
program.
There
are
a
lot
of
fun
terms
in
the
packet
like
receiving
sites
and
and
certificates
easements.
D
We
also
included
in
your
packet
information
about
the
process.
So
what
do
you
need
to
do
if
you
are
the
owner
of
ascending
site,
and
so
this
is
a
really
quick
summary
of
all
of
the
legal
language
in
the
code.
How
is
it
applied?
They'll
essentially
apply
with
the
city
to
get
a
certificate
of
TDR
availability,
and
that's
us
doing
a
calculation
figuring
out
how
many
activity
units
they
have
that
is
per
code.
D
So
once
we've
we've
gotten
our
certificate
of
TDR
availability,
how
do
those
certificates
then
go
to
a
receiving
site
and
are
finalized
through
development
activity,
so
essentially
everything
from
the
purchase
of
those
how
they
can
be
used
and
then
how
they'll
be
recorded?
And
then,
once
once,
a
building
permit
submitted
memorializing
that
additional
floor
area
moving
to
a
receiving
site.
D
We'll
also
be
hoping
to
get
a
recommendation
that
night
so
that
we
can
move
this
forward
to
City
Council,
of
course,
as
we're
working
through
this
there's,
always
things
that
come
up
that
delay
things
and
and
so
we're
hoping
for
it
to
be
done
on
the
seventh.
But
of
course,
sometimes
when
you're
dealing
with
a
very
technical
legal
thing,
fun,
technical
legal
things
come
up
that
we
need
to
address
before
we
can
move
it
forward,
and
so
tonight
we'd
like
to
have
more
conversation
with
you
all
any
feedback
questions.
D
Any
more
information
you'd
like
to
see
from
us
before
you
make
a
formal
recommendation
and
then
our
our
recommended
motion
is
to
continue
the
public
hearing
to
not
the
November
7th,
but
the
December
7th
2022
Planning
Commission
meeting,
and
so
with
that
I
am
happy
to
answer
any
questions.
You
all
have
open
up
the
code
and
share
it
on
the
screen
and
go
through
anything
you'd
specifically
like
to
ask
about
and
if
I
can't
answer
things
tonight,
I'll
make
sure
to
get
responses
for
December,
7th
2022.
D
A
C
Hi
Ashley
Sarah-
that's
in
here
thanks
for
this
packet,
it's
great
to
see
the
comparison
to
other
cities
and
I
really
like
that.
It's
clearly
laid
out
what
the
cost
of
a
credit
union
would
be.
I
see
it's
anywhere
from
about
14
000
to
about
25,
000
and
I
was
wondering
if
you
could
just
walk
us
through
what
is
just
summarizing
it
for
us
again.
I
know:
we've
been
through
this.
What
is
the
value
that
the
developer
will
get?
For
that
say,
twenty
thousand
dollar
credit.
D
So
essentially,
what
it
will
allow
them
to
do
is
listen.
We
have
minimums
and
maximums
of
how
much
you
can
develop
on
a
site,
and
this
would
allow
a
developer
to
develop
more
than
the
code
May
permit
them
to
develop.
So
they
get
additional
floor
area
or
units
that
they
can
move
essentially
from
one
site
to
another.
So
essentially,
the
the
bus,
Bay
North
site,
wouldn't
be
able
to
develop
those
units
in
the
future,
because
that
development
capacity
has
been
so.
D
If
someone
wants
to
do
something
bigger
than
what
they
may
be
permitted
to
do
outright,
it
gives
them
the
opportunity
to
buy
the
right
to
do
that,
while
reducing
the
right
to
do
that
somewhere
else
so
because
I'm
newish
to
Bothell
I
can't
remember
the
name
of
it,
but
there's
a
big
farm
on
the
west
side
of
this
town
and
that's
a
great
example
of
a
transfer
development
rights
that
happened
with
King
County
back
in
the
day
where
they
wanted
to
preserve
rural
land.
So
it's
it's
similar
to
that.
C
G
I'm
I
appreciate
the
the
toss
my
way,
but
every
every
project
is
so
different,
yeah
that
it's
it
literally
project
by
project
Pro
Form
by
proforma,
so
I'd
actually
was
interested
to
see
that
Redmond
had
done
a
lot
of
these.
So
there's
examples
of
successful
ones,
I'm
more
curious
about
that.
As
far
as
like
the
global
view
of
this,
so
you
know
they
ran
pages
and
pages
and
pages
of
calculations
showing
it
from
my
understanding
and
from
past
meetings.
C
D
And
so
what
we
could
maybe
talk
about
is
a
little
bit
of
how
that
works
and
how
so
there's
the
reality
too
of
it
may
take
a
while
for
there
to
be
a
market
for
these
credits
right.
So
it
could
be
that
someone's
analyzing
a
site
in
Thrasher's
corner
and
they
can't
make
a
profit
if
they
go
over
a
certain
floor
area
ratio,
because
they're
going
to
put
them
into
a
different
type
of
development.
So
they're
going
from
wood
to
metal
and.
C
D
F
D
In
20
years-
and
so
it
really
is
preserving
the
offer
opportunity
for
these
units
to
be
developed,
and
it
could
even
be
that
this
that
they're
not
used
for
50
years
in
Sound
Transit
moves
the
facility
and
they
put
the
credits
back
at
the
site.
So
it's
hard
to
say
if
and
when
the
credits
will
be
used,
but
it
has
been
successful
in
other
communities
as
a
way
to
to
preserve
at
least
preserve
the
right
to
to
have
that
amount
of
density.
Yeah.
A
B
Thank
you,
chair
right,
along
with
commissioner
gustafson's
question,
we
sort
of
started
edging
into
the
idea
of
banking
and
how
we're
going
to
be
using
these
units
and
how
we're
going
to
be
tracking
those
at
City,
Hall,
I
and
I.
Didn't
I
didn't
thoroughly
analyze
this
very
large
packet.
But
maybe
you
could
just
address
that
and
summarize
that,
verbally
for
her.
D
To
be
quite
honest
as
we're
developing
the
program,
we
also
need
to
figure
out
exactly
how
we
track
that,
through
through
banking,
there
will
be
a
covenant
recorded
as
a
part
of
the
property,
and
so
it'll
be
running
with
the
property
that
these
credits
have
been
sold.
It'll
also
be
something
that
we'll
be
tracking
internally
and
coming
up
with
a
mechanism
of
keeping
track
of
what's
been
banked,
who
owns
it,
how's
it
been
sold
and
how
we'll
be
keeping
track
of
that
as
something
that
we're
still
working
on
internally.
E
One
of
the
things
that
popped
out
to
me
in
the
packet
was
on
page
30
about
the
Surplus
property
policies,
and
the
thing
that
jumped
out
was
that
if
the
Surplus
properties
have
not
been
developed
within
a
10-year
period,
ownership
can
revert
back
to
sound
transit
and
I'm.
Wondering
I
have
a
couple
of
questions
about
that
policy.
E
One
would
be
I
mean
the
next
sentence
here
is
that
we
want
to
ensure
that
the
transferred
properties
do
not
become
speculative,
but
that
they're
actually
developed,
and
so
how
is
the
city
kind
of
planning
to
advertise
the
program
to
potential
developers
in
Canyon
Park?
Is
that,
like
a
when
someone
comes
forward
with
a
plan
or
pre-application?
Would
there
be
a
time
to
have
the
city
sort
of
like
advertise?
The
program
and.
D
Surplus
properties
policies,
so
I
have
Gary
Yao
here
with
Sound,
Transit
and
I
believe.
What
this
section
is
about
is
how
Sound
Transit
disposes
of
their
Surplus
properties,
and
so
let
me,
let
me
see
if
Gary
can
there,
he
is
Gary
might
be
able
to
provide
more
information.
I
can
give
a
really
cursory
but
I'll,
let
Gary
take
it.
H
Sounds
good!
Thank
you
Ashley.
My
name
is
Gary
Yao
I
am
a
sound
transit
senior
current
planner,
so
I,
look
at
land
use
and
Zoning
for
our
projects
and
I
am
the
main
point
of
contact
for
the
transfer
development
rights
program,
work
which
we've
been
closely
collaborating
with
Ashley
and
with
the
city's
consultant
Burke
on
developing
commissioner
kurd
to
answer
your
your
question.
H
H
The
agency
is
required
to
Surplus
80
of
its
property
of
surface
property
that
is
suitable
for
Housing
Development,
to
qualified
entities
and
within
those
properties
that
are
Surplus
in
that
manner.
Eighty
percent
of
that
needs
to
be
developed
as
affordable
housing
that
is
at
or
below
80
percent
fix
the
County
area
and
median
income.
H
I
would
say
that
I
think
the
agency
and
the
city.
We
certainly
have
a
mutual
goal
of
supporting
affordable
housing
development,
so
we
do
want
to
see
to
get
these
credits
used,
but
I
wouldn't
be
too
hung
up
on
that
10-year
timeline,
because
that
actually
does
not
come
from
State
statutes
that
regulate
How,
Sound,
transistor,
pluses,
its
property.
So
sorry
for
the
very
technical
and
long-winded
response,
but
I
hope
that
provides
a
little
bit
more
more
clarity
here.
That.
E
E
D
So
we
analyzed
that
and
in
anticipation
that
hopefully
someday
we
will
Annex,
and
so
that's
a
great
point,
because
three
and
four
until
we
Annex
would
be
the
only
super
blocks
that
could
receive
the
activity
units
or
be
receiving
sites
until
annexation.
But
if
you
know
in
the
near
future,
we
annexed
and
someone
had
super
block
one
or
two
and
wanted
to
make
it
a
receiving
site.
Then
it
would
be
eligible.
B
D
So
essentially,
what
we
found
was
that
there
were
nominal
impacts,
minimal
impacts
to
traffic
patterns
in
one
two
and
three,
but
four
had
impacts
to
the
intersection
that
made
it
undesirable
for
making
it
a
receiving
site,
because
it
would
need
potential
mitigation
and
that
wasn't
one
of
the
factors
that
we
were
looking
for.
We
were
looking
for
ideal
receiving
sites,
we're
looking
for
minimal
to
no
impact.
G
Wester
back
here,
maybe
you
covered
this
and
I
I
missed
it.
But
you
mentioned
you
talked
about
blocks
or
super
blocks,
but
eight
through
twelve
does
that
coincide
with
the
Canyon
Park
as
a
business,
Owners,
Association
kind
of
area
are
they
all
over
and
that
they
go
beyond
that,
or
is
that
primarily
where
they're
representative
I.
D
Would
need
to
dig
into
this
packet
of
how
we
got
there.
It's
a
conversation
I
had
a
while
ago,
but
I
can
prepare
and
answer
for
the
next
meeting
to
talk
about
how
we
selected,
which
sites
we're
looking
at
I,
think
a
lot
of
it
had
to
do
with
the
initial
analysis
from
the
Eis,
and
so
that
was
one
of
the
reasons
why
we
considered
the
items
in
blue
and
purple.
G
Sure
I
know
that
you
said
that
they
still
had
more
comments.
They
were
still
reviewing.
Everything
and
I
know
that
they
have
also
litigated
had
litigation
with
the
city
in
the
past,
about
like
Canyon,
Park,
Sudbury
plan
and
other
things.
So
I
was
just
curious
if
that
had
played
in
so
you
don't
obviously
don't
have
to
answer
now.
I
don't
need
a
thorough
answer
later,
I'm
just
curious.
If
that
was
part
of
it,
that
they
just
said
nope
not
interested.
D
And
I
do
believe
when
we
get
to
public
comment.
We
have
a
member
of
the
Canyon
Park
business
Owners
Association
here,
and
so
they
may
be
able
to
provide
some
insight
too.
I
know
it's
in
this
packet
of
why
we
didn't,
but
it
is
not
coming
to
the
top
of
my
head,
so
I'll
make
sure
to
cover
that
on
the
seventh.
G
E
A
Foreign,
so
a
a
comment
and
then
a
question
that
you
probably
can't
answer
just
for
the
record
I
think
it
is
important
to
directly
recognize
that
the
Sound
Transit
development
has
an
effect
of
reducing
Peak
trips
from
a
traditional
development,
so
to
get
the
bus,
the
buses
need
to
be
on
the
road
during
peak
hour
to
get
them
on
the
road.
The
drivers
need
to
be
there
earlier
and
get
out
before
the
peak,
so
that
particular
block
is
not
contributing
to
Peak
congestion.
A
I've
dealt
with
this
in
other
projects,
so
I
I
think
it's
really
important
to
have
that
out
there.
On
the
record.
My
question,
you
probably
can't
answer
it
goes
to
timing,
so
this
is
dependent
upon
the
application
being
filed,
and
is
this
so
it's
not
dependent
on
any
other
permits.
It's
the
filing
of
the
application
that
makes
these
development
rights
available.
D
Yeah,
so
essentially
what
will
happen
with
the
sound
transit
site?
Is
we
have
to
go
into
an
interlocal
agreement
with
them,
and
that
will
be
essentially
the
the
mechanism
by
which
these
rights
are
extracted
from
the
site,
and
so
they
will
kind
of
exist
on
paper
until
at
some
point
they
are
then
sold
and
developed
elsewhere.
So
they're
kind
of
going
to
be
in
this
weird
limbo
until
until
where
they
exist
on
paper,
until
they're,
purchased
and
developed
elsewhere,.
F
D
That
answer
the
question
and
we
don't
know
we
know
you
know
before
they
can
receive
their
permits.
They
need
to
have
gone
through
the
process
to
essentially
extract
the
activity
units
from
the
site,
because
otherwise
the
proposal
wouldn't
be
in
compliance
with
the
code,
but
we
don't
know
when
they'll
actually
be
purchased
or
how
long
they
will
exist
kind
of
only
on
paper.
A
A
A
D
A
D
I
Thank
you
very
much
deputy
director
Winchell,
whose
name
I
hope
I
have
not
just
butchered
hi
you
all.
Thank
you
very
much.
My
name
is
Molly
Lawrence
I'm
outside
Council
I'm
from
Van
s,
Feldman
to
the
Canyon
Park
Business,
Center,
Owners,
Association
and
I
guess.
My
first
comment
tonight
would
be
to
Simply
appreciate
the
request
by
deputy
director
to
extend
the
public
hearing
to
the
11th
of
December,
the
Canyon
Park
Business
Center
Owners
Association
is
a
board
driven
entity
and
several
of
our
board
members
own
properties
within
block
six
block.
I
Seven
block
nine
block
10
right
I'm,
looking
at
the
exhibit,
as
it's
shown
on
the
screen
and
are
all
very
interested
in
this
proposal
and
I.
Think
as
deputy
director
wentzel
has
indicated,
we
will
have
a
meeting
after
the
holiday
after
Thanksgiving
to
give
them
a
bit
more
information
that
will
then
enable
us
to
come
back
on
December
7th
with
any
comment.
So
I
really
appreciate
that
only
other
thing,
I
would
say
tonight,
because
I
do
think
we'll
come
back
on
the
7th
with
additional
substantive
comments.
I
I
We
have
been
engaged
in
litigation
with
the
city
in
the
past
and
the
focus
of
that
litigation
really
has
been
our
frustration
with
the
city's
effort
to
place
more
development
in
the
park
without
making
corresponding
Transportation
improvements
to
ensure
that
there's
adequate
traffic
capacity
to
accommodate
the
additional
trips
that
will
come
from
that
development
and
I.
Think
you'll
continue
to
hear
that
message
from
us.
As
you
begin
to
move
into
the
comprehensive
plan
update
in
2024
and
you'll
probably
hear
it
in
my
comments
on
the
seventh.
I
But
we
have
a
continuing
concern
and
interest
in
the
desire
of
the
city
and
we,
you
know
I
think
most
developers
appreciate
the
opportunity
for
more
development
on
their
property
and
the
value
that
that
brings.
But,
as
you
likely
know,
in
the
Canyon
Park
sub-area
in
this
area,
traffic
has
gotten
to
be
such
an
issue
that
it
is
actually
holding
back.
The
ability
of
the
area
to
develop
unless
and
until
the
city
is
able
to
address
some
of
those
Transportation
concerns.
I
A
D
A
A
Please
so
we
do
have
before
us
some
draft
final
conclusions
and
recommendations
which
we
would
adopt
if
we
move
this
forward
at
the
next
meeting.
So
maybe,
for
the
sake
of
time
at
the
next
meeting,
we
can
look
at
it
now,
okay,
so
a
lot
of
these
are
boilerplate.
The
findings
up
through
I'd,
say
seven
through
six
are
straight
up,
factual.
A
A
Seeing
none
I
think
we've
got
a
agreement
on
the
specific
findings
which
moves
us.
8,
9
and
10
are
pretty
pretty
factual
and
straightforward.
So
the
conclusions
speak
to
what
we
are
concluding
on.
This
item
any
comments
there
and
we
will
look
at
this
again
at
the
next
meeting.
So
if
you
do
feel
you'd
like
to
add
something
to
just
speak
directly
to
the
Council
on
this
we'd
have
that
opportunity,
then
I
just
wanted
to
be
sure
that
everyone
was
focused
on
this
before
before
we
move
on
all
right.
A
Seeing
seeing
none
I
I
think
we're
at
the
point
now
where
we
can
consider
what
action
to
take
and
the
choices
we
we
do
have
a
recommendation
that
we
continue
the
hearing
to
December
7th
to
allow
a
little
more
time
to
work
with
the
Canyon
Park
Association.
So
do
I
have
a
motion
to
continue,
commissioner
kurd
I.
A
So
we
will
look
forward
to
hearing
from
the
parties
then,
and
hopefully
moving
this
off
of
our
desks
here.
So
all
in
favor
of
the
motion
to
continue
to
December
7th,
please
indicate
saying:
hi,
hi,
okay,
we
have
all
six
president
Commissioners
voting
in
favor
of
that.
So
we
will
continue
this
public
hearing
until
December
7th
that
will
move
us
on
to
the
public
hearing
on
the
bike
plan.
J
J
A
L
A
L
K
All
right
well
good
evening,
Commissioners
again,
this
is
Sherman
gong
and
hope.
You
can
hear
me.
Okay,
through
this
mask
and
everything
city,
transportation,
planner
and,
as
you've
already
mentioned,
Steve
markalla
Capital
division
manager
is
with
us
tonight.
We
just
will
be
discussing
the
bike
plan
in
its
final
form.
K
Based
on
the
previous
comments
expressed
during
the
study
sessions
we've
had
with
you,
I'll
give
you
a
short
background
of
where
we
were
and
the
final
format
of
the
plan
and
we'll
go
over
a
few
minor
Network
revisions
that
were
missed
on
the
ultimate
Vision
map
and
then
finally,
we'll
go
through
the
comprehensive
plan.
Amendment
changes
that
we
are
also
proposing.
K
Since
we
last
met
with
you,
which
was
September
21st,
we
have
revised
the
plan
from
including
various
bike
facility
types
to
a
predominantly
protected
bike.
Lane
network,
as
the
ultimate
vision
for
the
city
now
We've
also
identified
additional
projects
that
could
be
considered
for
connectivity
such
as
I-45,
Crossings
and
Signal
operations
along
that
corridor,
plus
a
couple
of
others,
and
we
Revisited
the
project
prioritization
criteria
to
reflect
emphasis
on
diversity,
equity
and
inclusion
elements
as
well
as
school
routes.
K
The
plan
considers
prioritizing
and
ranking
all
of
the
protective
bike
lane
corridors
and,
along
with
a
few,
the
bike
connectivity
projects
I
just
mentioned
they
will,
they
will
enhance
and
expand
existing
Network.
We
considered
funding
that
we
will
use
for
considering
for
funding
and
implementation,
and,
although
the
ranking
that
we
developed
is
determined
based
on
the
criteria
and
is
just
one
of
many
factors
to
consider
for
Project
funding
and
does
not
solely
determine
the
order
of
which
projects
get
funded
or
constructed.
K
Proposed
bike
plan
needs
to
be
adopted
into
the
city's
comprehensive
plan
to
become
the
official
document
of
reference,
which
will
be
done
by
an
action
that
action
is
TR,
Dash
a65
and
that
we've
amended
to
the
comprehensive
plan
language,
and
it's
not
sorry
and
the
comprehensive
plan
bike
section
which
you
see
here
will
should
reflect
the
new
vision
of
the
city
bike.
Network
staff
proposes
to
amend
the
current
comprehensive
plan
by
revising
the
transportation
element
to
show
the
bike
section,
as
it's
shown
in
the
attached
in
your
packet.
K
The
revisions
basically
focus
on
you
know
level
service
requirements
for
the
addition
of
protected
bike,
lane
facilities
to
be
applicable
to
new
development
for
concurrency,
and
the
figure
TR7,
which
is
referencing.
The
comprehensive
plan
will
be
replaced
by
the
ultimate
Vision
plan
map,
which
is
map
4
in
your
in
the
bike
bike
plan.
K
K
and
then
to
bend
down
to
108
180th
street
right
here
this,
which
is
a
protected
bike
lane.
That's
the
first
adjustment
that
we'll
make
second
one
is
to
add
a
shared
path,
which
is
already
existing
right
here
between
180th
and
98th
Avenue
on
sr522
on
the
south
side,
there's
already
a
shared
use
path
there,
and
so
that
should
be
included
right
here
as
well
and
then
a
little
bit
of
confusion.
K
And
then
the
last
thing
is
just
this
little
black
mark,
which
I'm
not
sure
I
think
is
just
a
graphical
error
here
that
we
need
to
remove.
It
doesn't
mean
anything.
So
that's
for
the
map
revisions
and
then
the
next
steps
are
right.
Now
we
are
just
going
to
finalize
those
revisions
for
the
plan
as
we
prepare
for
Council
and
we
are
preparing
our
sipa
checklist
right
now
for
review
and
comment
period,
and
that's
all
I
have
for
you
guys
tonight.
C
Yes,
Sarah
Gustafson
here.
Thank
you,
chair
thank
Sherman
as
our
thanks,
planner
gong,
for
putting
together
the
math
and
getting
it
to
the
next
step.
This
is
really
exciting.
I
did
want
to
go
over
what
you
were
saying
about
the
route
from
I
guess
Bothell
Landing
to
Main
Street.
Maybe
we
could
flip
back
to
that,
so
it
it
still
looks
like
the
main
way
to
get
from
Bothell
Landing
to
Main.
Street
is
along
Bothell
Everett
Highway.
Are
we
going
to
instead
use
I?
Guess
it
would
be
98th
Street
as
the
preferred
route.
K
I'm
going
to
unmute
sorry
I
was
muted
there
for
a
second,
so
the
access
to
downtown
from
Bothell
Landing
is
that
is
along
at
Crossings,
at
98
or
Bothell
Way
or
over
the
bridge
on
102nd.
If
you
follow
the
trail
a
little
bit
and
then
get
up
and
above
and
start
522,
you
can
also
cross
a
little
further
west
180th.
So
there's
really
that's
how
this
downtown
was
set
up.
Was
those
Crossings
to
get
into
downtown
at
those
four
basically
locations
yeah.
L
C
C
C
C
K
From
98
to
means
from
98
intersection
of
98th
and
Main
Street
yeah,
so
that
street
will
be
Main,
Street
will
be
like
a
neighborhood
Greenway,
basically,
because,
okay,
the
volumes
on
that
and
the
traffic
speed
is
very
low
and
it'd
be
just
like
a
downtown.
You
know
like
right:
we're
not
gonna
you're,
sacrificing
to
put
protected
facilities
on
Main,
Street
you're,
sacrificing
a
lot
of
business.
You
know
property
or
parking,
which
is
very,
very
important
to
the
downtown
businesses.
J
C
J
C
J
J
It
is
crossing
six
Lanes
yeah,
it's
hard
with
transit
to
get
bat
Lanes
out
of
there
and
get
it
down
to
six
Lanes.
But
we
you
know
it
is.
It
is
a
big
crossing
right
and
then
you
are
using
the
access
Lanes,
which
are
probably
comfortable
for
a
lot
of
people,
but
certainly
not
for
kids
and
everything.
They're
pretty
slow,
I've.
J
Up
there
with
you,
know,
strollers
and
things,
but
you
do
not
want
your
kids
there
you,
you
know,
but
a
lot
of
adults
will
probably
be
very
comfortable
there.
A
hundred
and
first
is
difficult
because
it's
not
signalized,
we
work
with
washdot.
We
couldn't
get
our
Crossing
there.
There's
just
too
many
signals
in
a
row.
J
So
102nd
Avenue
is
is
a
good
one,
we're
trying
to
replace
the
bridge,
but
that's
some
years
out,
I'm
hoping
five
to
seven
years,
maybe,
and
if
we
do
that,
we
could
get
a
shared
use
path
on
one
side
and
if
we
can
get
that
really
broken
up
sidewalk
all
the
way
down
to
East
Riverside
Drive
we
placed
that
would
be
wonderful.
That
would
be
a
shared
use
path,
so
that
would
be
a
great
Crossing
but
again
lining
everything.
Up
from
the
north
across
522
to
the
South
is
a
little
problematic.
J
B
Question
about
the
excuse
me
discouraging
bikers
to
go
down
the
main
Transit
Corridor
by
changing
the
bike
over
here
by
Beardsley
and
into
that
neighborhood
over
here.
I,
see
that
you
guys
are
altering
the
originally
planned
bike
paths
so
that
they
don't
take
that
main
transit
route
down
into
the
college.
B
B
Just
I
believe
it's
north
of
Beardsley
I'm
really
going
to
discourage
people
from
shooting
through
really
going
to
encourage
people
to
go
considerably
from
what
looks
like
pretty
far
out
of
their
way
to
go.
North
and
forgive
me-
I
can't
see
the
name
of
this
road
that
you're
channeling
them
down
towards
100.
K
The
purpose
of
that
connection
on
Ross
Road
is
to
to
provide
a
a
path
for
that
really
isn't
that
far
much
farther
okay,
you
backtrack
a
little
bit.
If
you
ever
and
it's
much
safer
for
anybody
really
like
North
on
Maywood
Hill
going
to
campus,
they
would
they
could
cut
cut
across
on
that's
187th
is
the
neighborhood
street
there
and
just
follow
it's
a
downhill
goes
downhill
towards
towards,
like
basically
that's
that
area
is
called
the
Bothell
Gateway.
K
You
know
and
a
lot
safer
than
coming
all
the
way
down
to
either
try
to
use
185th,
which
I
would
imagine
some
experienced
spikers
may
want
to
do
and
come
across
to
Beardsley
going
east,
but
then
again,
they'll
have
to
you
know,
either
cut
through
campus
at
185th
or
travel
back
up
Beardsley,
which
will
be
a
protected
bike.
Lane
too,
you
know
and
and
then
come
into
campus,
so
they
definitely
if
you're
coming
from
the
north
film,
you
definitely
won't.
You
know.
K
I
I
can't
see
somebody
coming
all
the
way
down,
104th
all
the
way
to
Main
Street
and
then
turning
around
and
going
back
up
beersley
to
get
to
campus.
You
know
yeah,
it's
kind
of
kind
of
the
same
thing,
you're
just
backtracking
one
way
or
the
other,
so
we
felt
the
Ross
Road
connection.
It's
a
neighborhood
street
low
volume,
low
traffic,
low
speed,
there's
the
at
the
end
of
Ross
Road,
there's
a
little
Trail
you'd,
probably
have
to
Dismount
a
little.
K
K
And
again
that's
you
know.
The
focus
of
that
is
like
for
everybody,
North
on
Maywood,
Hill
and
trying
to
come
down.
You
know
in
from
that
direction.
Anybody
from
the
West
you
know
definitely
that
would
probably
stay
through
downtown
Main,
Street
or
whatever,
and
just
ride
straight
up,
beersley
Boulevard
to
campus.
So
that's
that
was
the
intent
of
of
that
corridor.
K
B
A
K
And
I'm
not
sure
we
haven't
really
thought
about
anything
to
so
we
could
stay
on.
You
know
or
you'd
have
to
create
a
basically
another
you'd
have
to
create
a
different
path.
You
know
for
a
bike,
a
bicyclist
to
stay
on
the
bike
and
ride
through
that.
But
again
it's
not
a
it's.
Not
it's
not
a
long
ways
to
switch
back
through
there.
Yeah.
K
Yeah
and
I
think
it's,
but
it's
just
from
a
safety
standpoint,
a
lot
better
than
and
a
lot
ultimately
it'll
be
a
lot
easier
for
bikes,
bicyclists
to
to
Traverse
that
way
to
get
to
campus
or
or
even
to
195th
and
going
over
the
North
Creek
Trail
to
connect.
You
know
what
I
mean
to
go
to
go
to
the
east
side
of
the
405.
K
E
K
E
I'm
talking
a
little
bit
about
timing,
just
because
Sound
Transit
will
be
issuing
their
they're
I,
think
60
plans
for
the
stations
and
the
routes
and
and
Bothell
along
the
transit
Corridor
soon
I
think
you
probably
know
more
than
anyone.
Yes,
yeah
I'm,
just
wondering
if
this
protected
bike
route
are
you
advocating
for
that
during
these
kind
of
plan
developments
or
what's
going.
K
On
there
well,
the
plan
right
now
for
beersley
is
that
that
part
of
that
portion
of
of
Piercy
Boulevard-
that
is
part
of
the
stride
project.
You
know
that
timing
is,
is,
is
kind
of
on
its
separate
from
anything
else.
Like
I,
wouldn't
say
the
whole
Corridor
is
going
to
get
built
at
the
same
time.
If
that's
what
you're
asking
I.E
anything
west
of
185th
May
that
may
come
later
at
different
times
than
than
the
segment
that's
between
185th
and
the
campus
access
and
even
beyond
the
campus
access
us
some
different
project.
K
J
Right
now
we
don't
have
plant,
we
don't
have
a
project
to
put
protected
bike
Lanes
there,
but
that's
the
idea
from
the
fire
station
to
North
Campus
entrance
on
the
South
Side
husky
Village
is
getting
redeveloped.
We
were
able
to
work
with
the
campus
and
Sound
Transit
and
they're
going
to
put
a
protected
bike
lane
there
behind
the
bus
stops,
so
that'll
be
cool.
J
When
you
get
closer
to
the
north
campus
entrance
they're
putting
you
back
on
the
street
for
now,
because
there's
a
short
segment
there,
they're,
not
improving
and
from
185th
that
kind
of
odd
road
that
goes
up
into
the
campus
up
in
behind
from
there
to
the
West.
There
won't
be
a
protected
bike.
Lane
there'll
probably
be
a
bike
lane
there
for
now,
because
that
whole
Frontage
is
not
getting
redeveloped.
J
So
we
got
a
good
long
length
for
Sound
Transit
and
the
campus
to
work
on
our
thought
is
on
the
North
side.
When
that
redevelops,
we
got
sound
transit
to
work
with
us
to
kind
of
lay
it
out,
but
we
can't
get
them
to
pay
for
it.
I
think
if
they
put
a
short-term
bus,
stop
there,
the
bike
lane
may
go
behind
the
bus
stop,
but
it's
going
to
be
a
relatively
short
segment
just
to
make
sure
they
don't
conflict
with
the
buses.
J
But
we'll
wait
for
development
on
that
side,
which
I
think
that
one
I
mean
it's
there's
a
lot
of
pressure
on
that
side,
I!
Think
of
the
road
as
you
get
to
between
North
Campus
entrance
and
I-405..
Currently
there's
on-street
bike
Lanes
there
we
remain
for
now
with
the
village
there
just
brand
new,
it's
very
hard
for
us.
J
E
E
There's
the
there's
no
bike
lane
on
that
North
Side.
It
turns
into
just
a
sidewalk
and
it's
a
new
sidewalk
and
so
I
I
field,
a
lot
of
questions
from
the
community
about
that,
but
really
exciting,
especially
to
hear
that
there's
some
planning
in
in
the
works
for
bike
Lanes
behind
the
bus
stop
sets
that's
cool.
E
E
So
this
is
kind
of
situated
project
41
is
between
project
seven,
which
is
the
bike
lanes
over
Nike
Hill
and
project
six,
which
is
you
know,
the
kind
of
the
flat
part
and
then
up
into
the
hill
on
the
other
side.
But
we
have
this
Gap
here
that
we're
planning
basically
for
what
could
be
decades
or
centuries
and
I'm
wondering
you
know
the
prioritization
of
number
41.
This
is
on
the
second
to
last
page
of
the
whole
packet.
E
K
The
reason
we
separated
that
commission
Kurt
is
because
that
segment
it's
in
itself
is
very
important,
because
it's
part
of
this,
the
north-south
spine,
you
know
block
away.
It's
going
to
be
the
connector
between
ninth
and
both
away
to
carry
from
downtown
I
mean
all
the
way
to
the
North
End
of
the
city.
K
You
know
it's
a
very
good
chance
that
you're
gonna
you're
going
to
redevelop
this
part
too.
It's
just
that
we
when
we
broke
it
out,
we
separated
the
segment
because
it
is
a
very
critical
portion
of
the
of
our
whole
entire
network.
I
mean
you
know
for
the
north-south
corridor,
and
so
we
wanted
to
break
that
out
separately,
because
that
project
kind
of
would
score
in
itself
a
little
differently
from
even
in
a
grant
opportunity.
K
For
example,
you
know
we
would
say
this
is
important
because
it's
part
of
our
north
south
route,
for
example-
and
you
know,
there's
again
it's
just
because
it's
a
short
section
it
doesn't
it
doesn't.
You
know,
connect
to
you
can
say
you
know,
you
could
say
it
connects
to
like
the
mobile
homes
or
anything
like
that.
But
you
know
everything
could
connect
to
something
via
a
different
or
an
added.
You
know
route
so
the
way
we
the
way
we
did
this
ranking
you
had
to.
K
We
just
had
to
say
if
it,
if
it
actually
the
route
actually
went
by
a
affordable,
housing
or
mobile
home
park,
then
we
gave
it
additional
points
as
far
as
Equity
goes,
and
so
you
know
just
so,
you
could
signifi
it
made
it
made
more
significance
than
saying
well,
you
know,
for
example,
to
the
east
on
228th,
where
that
Mobile
Home
Park
is
well
well.
35Th
is
just
as
an
important
connection
to
it
as
28
228
is
right
to
go
north
south,
but
where
do
you
and
where
do
you
draw
the
line?
K
You
know
what
I
mean,
and
so
that's
kind
of
how
we
that's
kind
of
just
how
the
rankings
were
done.
It
doesn't
mean
that
it's
gonna,
you
know
be
built,
be
late
way
later
than
the
other
two
sides,
but
if
there's
opportunity
it
would
it
would
grade
better
as
a
segment,
and
it
was
just
how
we
separated
the
projects.
I
mean
a
lot
of
these
corridors.
We
could
actually
separate
just
talking
about
beersley,
for
example.
K
J
J
Steve
but
I'm
going
to
ask
a
clarifying
question.
So
let's
talk
two
different
points
in
time
so
today.
Well,
let's
talk.
Let's
talk
five
years
from
now,
five
years
from
now
we'll
hopefully
have
a
facility
that
goes
from
downtown
all
the
way
up
to
240th
protected
up
both
away,
and
then
we
would
have
bike
Lanes
from
there
until
28th.
J
The
spine
and
vision
is
the
segment
you're
saying
go
up
to
ninth
a
little
bit
to
the
west,
and
then
you
go
up
ninth,
which
currently
doesn't
have
a
facility,
but
let's
say
toward
10
years
from
now
multimodal
we
get
ninth
and
we
have
ninth
there
and
we
have
Balto
Everett
Highway,
then
that
segment
becomes
a
connector
segment.
I
think
is
what
you're
saying
and
it
becomes
important
and
I
think
that
needs
to
be
kept
in
mind
and
then
the
prioritization
doesn't
keep
that
into
mind
right
now.
J
We
do
have
those
four
projects
that
we
said,
connect
existing
facilities
and
we
could
at
that
point
say
that
might
jump
to
a
different
list
where
this
has
connectivity
issues
that
maybe
it
makes
more
sense
to
finish
this
piece
and
get
good
bang
for
the
buck.
So
I
think
that's
something
we
need
to
consider,
but
I
think
it's
also
a
point
in
time
where
we
see
we
get
our
large
segments
put
together
and
we
can
get
best
bang
for
the
buck
to
fill
in
a
piece
that
allows
us
to
go
farther.
J
J
And
that's
another
piece
that
I
think
Sherman
was
trying
to
get
across
is
we
have
you
know
some
of
these
three
and
four
million
dollar
ones
that
are
highly
ranked
are
pretty
well
situated
once
you
start
getting
into
the
320
million
dollar
ones.
That
gets
very
difficult
and
there
may
be
periods
of
time
when
we
can
do
large
projects
like
that,
but
some
of
the
smaller
ones
down
the
list
that
are
smaller
amounts
those
might
be
lower
hanging
fruit
because
there
are
more
grants
available
at
that
size.
J
So
that's
why
we
say
this
is
a
tool,
but
not
the
end-all.
It
doesn't
mean
we're
going
to
go
one
two,
three
four
five.
It
just
gives
us
a
tool
that
we
make
sure
we're
looking
at
things
and
see
prioritization.
If
this
were
our
only
criteria,
but
what
money
we
can
get
connectivity.
Those
kind
of
things
matter
as
well,
so.
E
A
Perhaps
moving
continuing
Carson's
Point
commissioner
kurd's
point
when
we
looked
at
the
Canyon
Park
plan,
the
overall
plan
for
development
of
that
area.
Ninth
Avenue
was
very
significant
for
transportation
through
there
and
it
was
a
need
identified
to
widen
it
for
sidewalks
there's
a
school
there
with
you
know
inadequate
paths
for
for
walking,
so
I
would-
and
we
also
heard
from
the
Kenya
Park
folks,
alluding
to
the
transportation
issues
in
that
area.
So
I
think
nine
Ninth
Avenue
will
become
important
and
that
would
make
that
connectivity
very
important
as
well.
L
J
So
the
one
one
other
piece
I
want
to,
let
you
know
of
as
well,
is
as
an
example
in
our
cfp.
In
our
current
budget,
we
put
together
the
bike
program
which
we
have
some
money
in
there,
but
not
enough.
We
put
seed
money
in
there,
but
we're
going
to
rely
on
our
comp
plan
and
maybe
a
levy
in
the
future
to
beef
that
up,
but
that's
only
going
to
build
bike
only
projects
so,
as
I
alluded
to
I.
Think
in
the
past
I've
been
talking
to
many
committees.
J
J
That's
a
prime
example
of
what
we
call
a
multimodal
transportation
project
and
they're
large
projects,
they're
20,
30
million
dollar
projects,
because
you
put
in
Road
improvements
for
safety
like
left
turn
Lanes,
which,
although
they
widen
the
road,
if
people
have
to
hold
up
traffic
while
they
get
into
their
driveway
or
their
neighborhood,
that's
a
safety
issue.
Often
so
that's
the
vehicle
part,
and
then
we
put
the
bike
part
in
and
we
put
the
bed
ped
bark
part
again.
It
competes
very
well
for
the
larger
grants.
J
So
that's
separate
money,
that's
not
necessarily
bike
money,
so
we
will
get
those
corridors
done
as
large
Transportation
multimodal
projects-
that's
not
coming
out
of
the
bike
program,
so
we're
looking
at
different
ways
to
get
our
first
facilities
in
in
you
know
again.
That's
why
this
list
will
help
us
prioritize,
but
it's
not
necessarily
going
to
be
the
order
that
you'll
see
that
Ninth
Avenue
is
probably
not
at
the
top.
Neither
is
35th,
but
as
far
as
our
transportation
large
projects
go
there
toward
the
top.
J
J
Where
people
go,
we
will
have
to
look
at
our
Network
and
as
as
we
start,
our
Network
and
we
get
more
completion
done,
we'll
have
to
see
how
people
are
using
them
and
how
well
it's
going,
and
there
may
be
opportunities.
Example,
north
of
Ross
Road
or
in
that
neighborhood
there's
some
great
issues
and
everything
there,
but,
depending
on
what
kind
of
developments
go
there,
maybe
we
can
get
connectivity.
J
So
it's
a
living
document
and
we
can't
just
say
well
we're
done
it's
a
start
and
I
think
if
we
get
a
good
start,
Please
be
aware
that
they're
going
to
be
gaps
and
things
that
we
need
to
fill
in
and
we'll
need
to
make
Corrections
and
we'll
learn
that
something
works
better
than
other
things
and
we'll
have
to
make
those
changes.
So
it's
going
to
be
a
living
document
that
we're
going
to
continue
to
have
to
work
on.
A
H
F
F
L
D
D
F
J
Okay,
so
he
says
that
both
Everett
Highway
in
downtown
Bothell
is
a
neighborhood
Greenway,
regardless
of
what
signage
may
exist.
I
do
not
believe
this
route
should
be
included
on
any
bike
plan
without
facilities
equivalent
to
the
stress
level
of
the
road.
This
area
bother.
Everett
Highway
has
no
facilities
despite
having
relatively
high
speeds
and
a
large
volume
of
cars,
while
the
parking
areas
are
normally
designated
as
the
bike
facilities
here.
I'd
strongly
doubt
that
anyone
would
allow
any
children
to
bike
in
that
area
even
experienced
bikers
will
likely
stairway.
J
J
So
number
two
following
my
previous
suggestion:
I
do
not
see
a
safe
path
from
Bothell
Landing
into
downtown,
whereas
I
think
this
should
be
our
priority,
given
the
amount
of
traffic
from
the
Sammamish
River
Trail
and
our
Bridge
I
strongly
advocate
for
either
a
separated
path
between
Bothell,
Landing
and
Main
Street,
or
to
use
a
protected
bike
lane
on
98th
Avenue
Northeast.
Additionally,
there
is
no
current
Safeway
shown
between
downtown
Bothell
and
the
future
protected
bike.
J
Lanes
on
both
River
Highway
North
of
downtown
did
I
read
too
fast,
okay
and
then
item
three
there's
extremely
poor
north-south
connectivity
through
southern
Bothell
and
the
only
two
routes
on
the
Eastern
in
sorry
and
the
only
two
routes
are
on
the
eastern
and
western
edges
of
the
city.
I'd
strongly
Advocate
recognizing
112th,
Place,
Northeast,
AKA
lazy,
husband
Road
as
a
biking
facility.
A
E
E
And
then,
on
page
191,
there
are
a
variety
of
other
intersection.
Treatments
and
I
am
not
as
excited
about
page
190.
As
a
about
page
191
I'm
wondering
if
that
was
the
correct
figure
that
was
used
or
if
I'm
missing
something,
because
none
of
those
treatments
appear
to
be
included
in
the
typical
intersection
treatments.
K
So
those
the
the
drawings
and
the
dependencies
for
intersection
treatments
were
developed
with
the
help
of
our
consultant.
They
just
put
that
put
some
examples
if
you
will,
together
for
intersection
treatments,
our
our
plan
and
in
the
plan,
it's
written,
that
we
will
use
nacto
intersection
treatments
that
consider.
K
The
the
like,
the
islands
and
stuff
to
extend
traffic
out
around
coroners
and
and
whatnot
like
that
and
as
well
as
separated
you
know,
bike
and
pedestrian
Crossing
crosswalks.
So
you
know
we
didn't.
We
don't
really
have
a
specific
intersection
design
that
we
would
just
call
out
and
say.
This
is
how
we're
going
to
do
all
of
our
intersections
we're
going
to
use
the
tools
that
are
used
nationally
and
apply
those
to
a
specific
situation
given
geometric
constraints.
K
Given
traffic
volumes.
Given
the
you
know
what,
if
there's,
if
there's
two
routes,
Crossing
each
other,
for
example,
it's
going
to
be
a
variety
of
different
treatments
that
we
use.
So
what
you
see
in
the
appendices
as
far
as
intersection
treatments
go
is
is
not
a
specific
example
of
how
we
you
what
we
use.
We
may
use
a
portion
of
one
but
they'll.
All
the
all
of
the
treatments
will
be
based
on
nacto
guidelines,
National
accepted
standard
guidelines.
E
Understood
I
would
encourage
the
deletion
of
the
typical
intersection
treatment
figure
on
page
190,
then
because
it
does
suggest
otherwise
to
readers,
so
I'm
encouraged
by
using
nacto
guidelines
and
a
lot
of
the
treatment
on
page
191
of
whatever
appendix
this
is
they're
encouraging
and
they're
inspiring.
But
page
190
gives
me
great
pause,
looking
at
and
kind
of
imprinting
a
couple
of
our
large
intersections,
especially
at
228th
and
Bothell
Everett
Highway.
That's
kind
of
what
I
was
thinking.
This
was
trying
to
display,
and
it's
not
and
I
understand
that.
E
E
E
I
have
two
suggestions.
Maybe
I
don't
know
where
to
provide
comment
about
the
comprehensive
Plan
update
yet
and
it
may
be
early,
but
these
are
some
things
that
came
up
during
all
of
our
discussions
about
the
bike
plan
and
we
should
have
a
space
where
we
can
record
these
so
that
when
we
are
going
through
comprehensive
plan,
Amendment
or
update,
we
can
encourage
change
on
these
so
tra62
on
page
143
encourage
existing
and
new
employers
and
businesses
to
provide
convenient
bike,
parking
facilities
for
employees
and
customers.
E
We
talked
about
well
one
it's
required
by
code,
and
so
this
should
be
require,
and
then
we
also
had
great
discussion
about
safe
bike
parking
like
lockers
and
just
the
kind
of
environment
of
the
storage
too,
making
sure
that
it's
well
lit
that
their
eyes
on
it.
Furthermore,
we
had
a
I
think
we
had
a
little
bit
of
discussion,
I,
think
on
commission-
or
maybe
this
was
in
one
of
the
bike
plan
meetings
about
some
of
the
more
artistic
bike
racks.
E
E
E
This
is
something
that
is
only
kind
of
adjacent
to
this,
but
Transit
facilities
includes
buses,
and
so
in
Bothell
we
have
the
green,
the
Swift
green
line,
and
it's
kind
of
Cutting
Edge
in
that
that
they
allow
bikes
to
be
driven
right
on
or
you
know,
not
ridden,
but
driven
right
onto
the
bus
for
storage,
and
then
you
take
them
off
the
bus
and
that
helps
with
speeding
up
on
and
off
boarding.
But
I
understand
that
Sound,
Transit
and
Metro
haven't
really
collaborated
or
corroborated
any.
E
But
that's
definitely
something
that
we
should
enshrine
in
kind
of
our
guiding
vision
for
the
city
is
making
sure
that
we
collaborate
with
and
that
we
take
a
position
on
design
of
Transit
facilities
which
include
buses.
When
we're
thinking
keeps
me
thinking
about.
You
know
our
bike
plan
and
making
sure
that
people
can
get
from
one
bus
stop
to
another
successfully
and
safely
bye
bike
foreign.
A
D
We
should
have
some
space
on
the
December
7th
docket,
which
we
are
going
to
talk
about
what
we
have
left
for
the
end
of
the
year
later
in
tonight's
agenda,
and
so
I
think
we
can.
You
know
ing
how
much
of
the
conversation
has
happened
and,
and
what
may
be
left
to
address,
make
time
for
the
the
findings
and
hopefully
getting
it
to
the
point
that
you
all
can
make
a
recommendation
for
for
City
Council.
A
All
right,
thank
you,
yeah.
This
is
an
important
item
to
the
city
and
to
many
of
the
Commissioners
directly,
so
I
think
we
would
like
to
have
a
little
time
to
review
those
findings
and
and
make
some
specific
comments
before
taking
action.
I'm
speaking
for
myself,
I'd
welcome
other
Commissioners
to
weigh
in
as
to
whether
we
are
prepared
so
I
guess
that
would
be
a
question
whether
it's
a
motion
to
continue
this
pending
getting
findings
for
our
review.
A
You
so
it's
been
moved
and
seconded
that
we
continue
this
hearing
pending
the
receipt
of
findings,
conclusions
and
recommendations.
Is
there
any
discussion
anything
that
people
want
specifically
to
be
included
beyond
what
we
discussed
today
or
any
other
discussion
around
this
motion?
Commissioner
Kurt
thank.
A
A
G
I
know:
we've
been
critical,
but
I
do
at
least
want
to
acknowledge.
I
appreciate
the
work
you
did
to
go
back
and
come
through
this
and
I
understand
that
sharrows
were
not
not
a
productive
use
of
the
bike
plan
policy
and
to
listen
to
us
and
a
council
and
to
whip
this
into
a
much
more
productive
bike
plan.
That
I
think
has
some
legs
for
future
multi-modal.
A
A
A
A
D
D
So
we're
looking
at
right
now
at
a
minimum
of
probably
two
study
sessions,
one
on
the
17th
and
one
on
February
7th
and
then
we're
allotting
for
a
public
hearing
either
on
the
14th
or
the
21st.
But
we're
also
recognizing
that
it
may
be
a
couple
of
public
hearings
based
on
public
interest.
So
we're
trying
to
make
sure
that
we're
giving
Council
the
time
they
need
to
hear
from
the
public
and
make
a
decision
and
break
down.
A
Yeah
there
has
been
significant
public
feedback
around
involvement
in
a
hurdle
rumbling
about
it,
some
of
it
based
on
misconceptions,
so
yeah
it'll
it'll
get
interesting
with
that
said.
Is
there
an
interest
in
drafting
a
letter
expressing
the
interest
of
the
commission
and
moving
this
forward?
Looking
at
that
timeline,
we'd
certainly
have
time
to
review
such
a
letter
either.
The
next
meeting,
the
seventh
or
presuming
I,
don't
know
if
I'll
meet
December
21st
that
starts
to
get
holiday,
stepping
on
holidays.
D
A
A
C
Thank
you
for
that
great
question.
Sarah
Gustafson
here
I
do
believe
that
the
when
I
was
thinking
of
it.
The
focus
was
urgency
because
I
know
it
will
get
to
counsel,
but
I
believe
that
our
original
timeline
based
on
the
housing
action
plan,
implementation
Grant,
was
for
this
fall
and
I
think
it's
important
to
have
some
legislation
on
the
books
in
the
next
year,
so
that
when
we
do
our
comprehensive
plan,
which
we
have
a
grant
to
help
us
expand,
we'll
have
legislation,
that's
already
there,
so
we
can
see
well
what
are
the
impacts?
C
B
Are
you
feeling
that
we
should
continue
to
prompt
them
regarding
urgency,
just
so
that
they
stick
to
the
earlier
days
of
like
the
14th
as
opposed
to
the
21st
or
I
guess,
given
the
now
that
they
do
have
a
vague
timeline
to
complete
by
end
of
February?
Do
you
feel
like
the
letter
is
still
necessary,
or
what
are
you
thinking.
C
D
Deputy
director,
so
our
grant
timeline
there's
two
things
that
we're
aiming
for
in
this
when
they
passed
try
to
summarize
the
legislation
correctly
when
they
pass
the
legislation
for
this
grant
funding.
There
was
also
some
assurances
in
terms
of
essentially
safe
harbors
for
adoption,
and
so
there's
an
April
1st
Safe
Harbor.
If
we
don't
pass
anything
by
April
1st,
then
there's
other
amendments
we
will
need
to
make
to
our
comprehensive
Plan
before
we
can
adopt
the
middle
housing.
L
D
So
we're
aiming
for
getting
it
done
prior
to
April
because
of
that
Safe
Harbor.
If
we
don't
meet
that
deadline,
then
it
will
extend
this
out
because
we
will
need
to
make
amendments
to
our
comprehensive
plan
because
it
because
there's
protection
from
appeals
to
the
growth
management
humans
board,
and
so,
while
it's
not
necessarily
a
rush
to
avoid
appeals.
D
G
C
A
So
if
there
is
an
interest
of
the
commission
to
do
that,
we
can
certainly
have
a
motion
that
a
an
ad
hoc
committee
be
formed
to
draft
such
a
letter.
We
could
then
I
would
hope
we
could
get
that
done
in
time
for
the
December
7th
meeting
and
put
it
under
our
sanding
item
report
to
council.
Bringing
on
the
next
agenda
get
a
draft
letter
in
our
packet.
We
could
all
review
it,
discuss
it.
I
can
sign
it,
and
then
we
can
decide
who
reads
it.
A
A
A
D
A
The
30th
and
again
that
would
be
a
draft
letter
that
we
would
discuss.
So
if
you
have
questions
but
open
issues
for
further
discussion,
certainly
that
you
know
you
can
keep
that
in
mind
and
we
can
take
it
from
there.
But
thank
you
for
volunteering
to
do
that.
Work.
We've
all
discussed
the
importance
of
it.
So
we'll
look
forward
to
that
any
other
unfinished
business
then.
D
So
we
wanted
to
update
you
all
on
where
we
are
with
certain
items.
I
think
we
all
know
that
we've
had
turnover
this
year
and
changes
that
have
resulted
in
some
things
taking
longer
than
ideally
they
would.
And
so
we
wanted
to
provide
an
update
on
that.
But
then
also
wanted
to
talk
to
you
all
about
the
fact
that
we
have
two
meetings
at
the
end
of
this
year:
falling
very
inconveniently,
close
to
holidays,
and
so
I
wanted
to
make
sure.
D
So
on
December
7th,
we
have
three
potential
items:
I've
been
working
on
the
fly
in
the
meeting,
so
I've
already
updated
it,
but
essentially
we
anticipate
potentially
having
downtown
transition.
Affordable
overlay
private
code
amendments,
we
were
waiting
on
some
items
from
the
applicants
to
make
sure
that
we
had
a
full
package
to
bring
to
you
all
and
so
assuming
that
they
get
us
those
items
on
time.
D
We're
hoping
to
bring
you
all
a
study
session
to
continue
that
conversation
on
the
seventh
we'll
also
have
the
public
hearing
on
the
transfer
of
development
rights
and
on
the
bike
plan.
So
that's
what
we're
anticipating
on
the
seventh,
we
had
thought
about,
bringing
you
all
the
2023
planning
docket,
but
seeing
as
how
long
that
meeting
is
already
getting.
It
seemed
like
that
is
an
item
that
could
probably
warrant
its
own
meeting.
D
D
That
being
said,
we
we
put
together
some
scheduling.
Questions
later
on,
which
I'm
realizing
I
put
this
in
a
weird
order,
so
scheduling
questions
of
are
people
going
to
be
present
on
the
21st?
We
could
keep
the
meeting
on
the
21st.
We
could
move
it
up
to
the
14th
or
we
could
cancel
the
meeting
in
general
and
then
the
same
for
the
fourth.
We
could
either
keep
the
meeting
of
the
fourth.
D
D
Efforts
which
we
think
is
a
win-win
for
all
of
us
to
have
a
more
cohesive
look
and
also
to
potentially
have
better
development
potential
on
that
site,
because
every
time
I
drive
by
it
I
think
about
this
huge
chunk
of
land
that
could
be
really
used
in
a
really
cool
way.
So
that
is
potentially
coming
off.
The
docket,
the
transfer
development
rights
is
is
obviously
active.
D
The
bike
plan
is
active,
we'll
of
course,
be
doing
the
2023
planning
docket,
which
will
be
very
comprehensive
plan
heavy
and
then
the
one
item
that,
in
all
the
transition
has
not
made
any
movement,
is
the
downtown
historic
preservation
code
Amendment.
So
it's
very
likely
you'll
see
that
on
the
docket,
with
docketed
time
for
2023
to
pick
that
back
up,
we've
had
conversations
about
how
much
it's
impacting
by
not
being
moved
forward
and
it
was
kind
of
the
lowest
impact
on
our
everyday
operations.
D
So
with
all
of
that
in
mind,
just
thinking
about
the
next
two
meetings
and
what
we
anticipate
having
on
your
agenda,
the
seventh
we
have
a
pretty
well
fleshed
out
agenda
and
then
the
21st
or
the
the
21st
of
December
or
the
4th
of
January.
The
focus
will
very
likely
be
our
2023
docket
and
potentially
some
updates
on
downtown.
If
it's
the
downtown
code
amendments,
if
ready
and
potentially
a
kind
of
intro
to
our
comprehensive
Plan
update.
A
D
A
So
with
that
I'll
I'll
pull
the
Commissioners
is
and
we'll
take
the
21st
first
and
then
talk
about
the
fourth.
We
need
per
our
bylaws
at
least
four
Commissioners
for
a
quorum
to
take
any
action.
Do
we
have
folks
who
know
they
have
a
conflict
on
the
24th
just
a
couple
of
days
before
Christmas
21st
I'm?
Sorry,
a
couple
of
days
before
the
24th
when
we'll
all
be
busy?
It's
a
Saturday
right.
A
A
D
D
D
And
then,
of
course,
if
any
of
you
all
as
it
gets
closer
and
you
just
are
feeling
in
the
holiday
spirit,
not
in
the
Planning
Commission
spirit
and
aren't
going
to
be
here,
let
us
know
and
we
can
adjust
accordingly.
If,
if
we
find
out
our
our
Quorum
because
we'll
assume
we
have
six
members
until
further
notice.
A
A
Know
well
just
looking
at
the
bylaws,
we
need
four
present,
regardless
of
how
many
are
on
the
commission
having
a
new
member
might
make
it
easier
to
keep
for,
but
all
right,
I
I
think
that
so
we
don't
need
a
motion
if
we
keep
things
where
they
are
yeah,
so
I
think
we've
addressed
that
issue
any
other.
Are
we
on
reports
from
staff
or
unfinished
business
I
forget.
D
At
this
point
in
time,
no
I
think
either
on
the
7th
or
the
21st
or
new
director
will
be
able
to
join
us,
and
you
all
get
a
chance
to
meet
them,
which
I
think
will
be
really
helpful.
As
we
move
forward
with
the
docketing
process,
and
then
we
will
bring
I
think
with
the
the
2023
docket,
we'll
revisit
the
2022
docket
to
in
a
more
thorough
way,
because
I
think
you
know
we
did
go
through
it
roughly
to
provide
the
update
tonight.
A
G
G
G
D
E
E
E
You
should
attend
because
it's
interesting
and
also
to
learn
about
the
alternatives
for
restoring
natural
stream
and
River
processes
to
the
former
Back
Nine,
the
one
that's
adjacent
to
Blythe
Park.
The
next
one
is
that
the
Washington
State
Department
of
Commerce
is
hosting
a
virtual
webinar
on
December
6th,
it's
from
3
to
4
30
in
the
afternoon,
and
it's
to
provide
guidance
on
racially
disparate
impacts
for
local
governments.
Doing
housing
planning
this.
E
It
includes
exclusion
and
displacement
risks
and
it's
one
of
the
outcomes
of
that
former
House
Bill
1220
that
was
supported
by
Bothell
State
Legislative
delegation,
the
state.
This
is
number
three.
The
state
has
also
hired
the
missile
not
missile
the
middle
housing
experts
at
opticose
design
to
assist
with
developing
a
communication
and
Outreach
toolbox
around
middle
housing
for
local
governments,
and
so
those
resources
are
in
progress
now
and
they
will
nicely
complement
our
recommendation
to
council
and
then
I
also.
E
D
Thanks
for
that
and
I
don't
know
if
everyone
knows
this,
but
Barbara
Grace
was
a
planner
here
at
the
city
of
Bothell
and
did
a
lot
of
historic
preservation
work.
And
if
you
go
to
oh,
my
gosh,
the
name
of
the
parks
escaping
me,
the
brick
road
Park,
there's
actually
a
memorial
for
her
there
that
Dave
Boyd
showed
me.
So
it
was
extra
special
finding
out
that
she
was
an
employee
here
and
and
whatnot.
So
thanks.
C
A
All
right
so
so
we
did
push
a
bit
on
some
items
in
this
meeting,
but
I
think
I'm
sure
I'm
speaking
for
the
whole
commission
thanking
staff
for
the
work
you've
done
in
these
items
and
your
receptiveness
to
our
comments.
There's
a
lot
of
interest
here
and-
and
we
do
a
look
across
the
table,
but
we
do
think
you
hear
us
when
we
speak.