Can you hear us?
» Theory, you can hear. Okay,
» she's >> Oh, great.
» Yes, I can hear you. Sorry. >> Okay, thank you. I just wanted to double
check. >> I'm at home because I have a cold.
» That kind of worked.
» That should be good in the middle. Okay.
» All right. Good evening. It is 6:01 and I call to order the regular meeting of
the Dubal Planning Commission for Wednesday, August 26th, 2026.
Uh, please rise and join me for the pledge of allegiance
to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it
stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice
for all.
» Okay. Item number two on our list here is roll call. We have
got vice chair William Chapel here. We got Abasha.
We have Erie Ericson Brown online. >> We have Mala Matuba David.
Um that's it. Item number three, approval
of the agenda. Um, are there any additions, deletions, or changes to the
order on the agenda? The chair will entertain a motion to
approve the the agenda. I move to approve the agenda for August
26, 2026 planning commission meeting as present as presented. Do I have a
second? >> Yes. All in those or sorry, it's been
moved and seconded. Um, see no further discussion on this, I think we just move
to pass the uh agenda. All those in favor say I.
» I. I. >> Those opposed say nay.
» The motion carries. Item four is the good of the order. This is an
opportunity for the commissioners to raise announcements, scheduling matters,
or items of interest. Uh, no action is taken under this agenda under this item.
Do any commissioners have anything for the good of the order? Hearing
nothing further, we'll move on. Item number five is the approval of the
minutes from the August 12th, 2026 planning commission meeting which are
included in tonight's packet. Are there any corrections to the minutes?
Okay, there's no uh changes to the uh minutes. The chair will entertain a
motion to uh
approve the uh August 12th uh minute meeting minutes as presented. Do I have
a second? Okay,
that's been moved and seconded. And all those in favor to approve the agenda or
sorry the minutes uh say I. All those opposed.
The motion is to approve the minutes is uh is is approved.
Uh item number six, city staff announcements.
Uh we will now hear from staff. >> Um baby, director of community and
economic developments. Uh good evening everybody. Um I would like to propose um
a procedural item for the planning commission. Sometimes there's confusions
when motions are made and amendments are made to motions. So any moving forward
whenever we have an agenda item that requires um an action by the planning
commission um I propose that we have a a word dock or a slide or something up on
the screen where we can write out what the motion is so everybody can be aware
and um um because I have been at countless
hearings where a motion's made. It's not actually I've written down and then we
have to go back and listen and then we do minutes and no that wasn't what we
meant. So I just to save us all the confusion. So as a procedural item I
this time raises great. Um are there any other staff announcement?
» Okay.
» Fantastic. Any other city staff announcements?
» Item number seven is public comment. This is time for members of the public
to address the commission on any matter within the commission's
uh purview here. I think we do have some people coming in.
Uh did anybody want to see?
» Hi. Um Jessica here. sure where you all are at. So,
» we're there. I mean, so you're the stage is yours.
» Okay. >> I'm gonna run through the the rules
here. We do have a cool little handy guide over here for all the public
comment rules. You must be present and limited to three minutes and
keep
I'll do my notes. Hi.
Um, everybody uh knows me as Boomer. Um, we me and my wife have been living here
um since 2020. We moved uh here during co
and um we really love living in Dubal and in
fact we live kind of here in Oldtown. We're right here on Sherry Street and
just above First Avenue. which means we're on the front lines,
our house. Um, I
uh have a lot of concerns about the proposals.
Public safety is a big one. Um, we
if any of you do live here in Duval and commute across the valley on a regular
basis, you you know that we we flood every year and we have very limited
access. Uh, I work at Udub, so I drive in the
mornings to uh, Redmond Transit Center and I take the bus to university and
commute back home. Well, when we're flooding
the traffic because lots of really Woodenville Duvall Road becomes our if
it remains open cuz this last year it was down also and there was no access.
So I spend the night on the other side of the valley.
Um but for the rest of the time,
Woodenville Dupal Road becomes the only access in and out and that's for
emergency vehicles. That's for commuters and it really gets backed up and it
takes a long time to get back across now. Um so that is just one point that I
would like to make. So I um I would like to know if the um if there is a
projected population growth is there a number that we're looking to absorb
and that's you know um so I would like to see those numbers and I want to see
also um uh emergency evacuation plans
because that affects everybody. That affects,
you know, our first responders to be able to do their jobs appropriately.
Um, yeah, I
I'm going to stop there. I may have more.
» Yeah. [clears throat]
» I'll say something. >> Uh, hi. Hey, my name is Joe Porter. I'm
the other half. We um we moved here from Isaqua after spending our whole lives in
Miami, Florida, watching it get completely overdeveloped.
We have a really sour taste in our mouth from those experiences. When I was born
in South Miami, Florida, there were less than 10,000 people there. Now there are
millions of people there and the development was pretty unchecked. So, I
appreciate that you're having these meetings to discuss plans and try to
figure out how we can accommodate um new people moving into the area. But
the main reason we moved here is because we wanted to have a small town
experience. If if another several thousand people
move here and we're talking about really tall developments with super dense here
in Oldtown and Uptown, it will not ever be the same. And a lot of the reason
people come here is because it's, and you've all heard it, it's such a
charming small town. We have a historic legacy here that I really think needs to
be preserved. That's all I'm say. Thanks, Joe. Yeah.
My name is Heather Morris. I've been a proud Juval resident for 25 years.
We've um considered this place um our home. We raised our kids here.
They've all grown up and gone. Um, and this has always been such a safe town
and it's harbored so many family local family businesses.
Um, one of the things that I'm very concerned about with the planning for
high density population right in the in town, mixed
use buildings that um will take away from
the um take away from the the businesses.
Uh and and these types of buildings cost way more to the business owners
that are trying to run their business, their small businesses in town, which
are by the way like brick and mortar. They're already just scraping by.
So if we see any of these areas being wiped out
um and replaced with these mixeduse buildings
um that could be that could drive out so much local business.
Um and that's one of the beautiful things about
this town is that we support local. So, I'm just here on behalf of the support
local voice and um and saying um I don't think this is the best thing
for for Duvall businesses. Um
thank you for listening.
Oh, okay. [laughter]
» Hi. >> Yeah. My uh my name is Pam Barton. I run
a business here in town. I've been a resident for over 30 years. Historic
Duvall is our legacy. It's important. Um, even as a business owner or not an
owner but running a business, we haven't even been to put a sign up because
they've had regist you know strict guidelines. Do not do not mess with
historic downtown do all this is it's special. It's you know it needs to be
left alone. I understand I know you guys are not trying to wreck town. We're just
trying to figure out good options. Um but as as somebody that's been in the
community for a long time, it would be devastating to see that gone. Um, that
is why people come here. That is that is why we are a charming town. We're
getting ready to have the art wine walk. We're trying to invite people from all
other communities to come see our community. Um, if we lose what we have,
that's going to be a real big loss. Thank you.
» Thank you very much.
Thanks for letting us
all speak again.
» Okay. Um >> comment from mission. Yes, you can
if you want. Yeah, man. We're all we love this.
» Thank you for all being uh there's no one else further
who wishes to speak. Uh public comment is now closed.
Uh item number eight is presentations. We have two this evening. Comprehensive
plan appeal which included the status update and a discussion of title 14
density, heights and design standards. Uh these are informal. So no action will
be taken on any of these items tonight. They're just presentation. So
we will start with item 8A which is the comprehensive plan.
So um just to give a brief update we had as our open house last week we had about
around 10 people in attendance for that uh some good discussion whatnot. I kind
of described in the staff report some of the feedback that we had which included
some of the comments that we heard tonight from citizens about uh concerns
for emergency management traffic um and preservation of character in the overall
town area. So um so so that's kind of um that's the gist of of what we we did so
far. Um I have a brief presentation on kind of the appeal and as we approach uh
amendments to the comprehensive plan for the um as part of our work plan with the
state of basically what I'm going to do is kind of outline uh what amendments
that we need to um to make to that. So this kind of tells you a little bit. We
do have to um we're not looking at substantial updates to the comprehensive
plan that we have now. A lot of the policy directives and everything are
pretty much the same. Um I would say and I'll kind of dive into I guess a little
more detail of that as in general right now. But um as far as the transportation
element goes, because we are updating the land capacity analysis, we have to
update our transportation analysis as well for that uh to support it and
evaluate our level of levels of service and needs um to make sure that that's
matching up. And um once we do complete that, we will be sending that to Puget
Sound Regional Council for their certification and review as well. So um
that'll be included in the analysis. Uh as far as the land use element goes, we
will have some future land use map updates. Most of those updates are
really actually for um what we're trying to do right now with
our um interlandest map. We have some areas that are some of the mapping is
just it it can be clarified on on how zones are designated. Um some zones are
kind of separated out into different areas. We're looking at, you know, the
mix zones now and residential zones. So, we'll be kind of putting those together
as well. Um and so I'm I'm being very vague because we're going to be coming
back to you with like actual things you can look at. So this is just kind of to
give you an idea of the scope of work that we're looking into. So um we will
be also updating the designation descriptions as well to make sense for
um reorganizing the zone districts by designation. So that's going to make
sense in the future. But um an example of a designation would be uh whether
it's designated for public use or residential mix use uh light industrial
and I feel like I'm creating one maybe
there's another >> we tried to really simplify it
» residential neighborhood residential moderate mixed use industrial public.
» Yeah, those are in the subzones. So, we'll have to go through and kind of
just update the descriptions in this land use element to basically make sense
with the the zoning changes and whatnot we're doing. So, uh moving forward for
the housing element, this is where most of our work will be. Um the rest is just
kind of like small updates, I would say, in comparison to this. And I wouldn't
say that it's uh the amount of changes that we have to do
is really related to incorporating our I guess better incorporating our housing
action plan that was done in 2023 into the comprehensive plan. Uh some of that
is where was it King County and commerce kind of
highlighted some errors and issues is that we didn't really incorporate the
housing action plan fully into our housing element. And so we had some gaps
in terms of demonstrating compliance with uh certain um policy directions
from I guess countywide planning policies and also
um at least I believe commerce as well on their guidance. Uh I wouldn't say
that we didn't uh with this that we didn't do what we were supposed to. We
have we had our housing action plan referenced in the comprehensive plan. we
just really didn't do the work to like integrate that as well as we could have
to show compliance. So, um some of this work will also be looking at I'll just
kind of go a little more in detail. So, um
so like I said, incorporation uh making those findings from the action plan
clear uh a little more uh I guess it sounds like just a little more breath to
it, but it kind of almost is that. Um, and so that's what we'll be doing there.
We'll also be um or I just wanted to note too that uh we aren't starting over
from this. We did a lot of work with that housing action plan as part of
community outreach. Uh it was passed by council in 2023. So this is some work
that's already been completed. So we did do quite a a bit of outreach and uh
analysis under that. So, um, and I wanted to highlight too some
of the things we heard from that process as well, which are some of the main
things that we're trying to, I guess, solutions from it that we're trying to
incorporate into the housing element. So,
and here's just kind of a little bit of some uh basic data from there that's
kind of interesting that we'll be including um I guess into the housing
element as well. It just kind of highlights some of the the main issues
or challenges that we're facing in the community with regards to housing. So,
you can see medium home prices is pretty behind Duval. So this is why it's kind
of I guess come to the attention of other agencies valid being able to um
accommodate a variety of uh economic situations.
So um just just kind of to further that uh as
far as what that element needs to address, these are kind of the main
themes here. So, um, what we have as far as, um, and I'll
just kind of jump to because
sorry, I'm getting a little out of order, but, um, what we'll do with this
and part of what we've been doing with the title 14 updates is incorporating a
lot implementing a lot of these policies when it comes to the housing types or
special needs housing. And um yeah, so that's and then also displacement with
things like the um mobile home park designation and zoning.
So um
so what what I have listed here are some of the identified um in this slide and
the next few slides uh the highlighted countywide planning policies that King
County King County Housing Committee uh identified that we needed to better
address
Yeah. So, um, one of the the main things too is that
we really have to identify um any or at least better explain uh historical
barriers in Duval over time of um to housing and some of the um
I guess uh discriminatory practices that may have occurred in the past. I will
say from our housing action plan that did do an analysis of this. Uh they used
um state and King County records and other sources to um analyze for history
of redlinining and other types of discriminatory practices, but they uh
they didn't find anything necessarily specific to Dubal. And it doesn't mean
that that wasn't something that happened in Dubal. But it means that uh as far as
we can find through our accessible sources, we can't find at the at this
time. But there are things in terms of policies that we can recognize that
maybe there have been barriers to housing in the community.
So um some of the the goals that we'll be looking at to incorporate that uh the
findings from the housing action plan will be uh these are some of the goals
that we'll be trying to achieve and we'll have some implementation
directives for to try to address and um part of this um I will say the
comprehensive plan is it's a policy document it's meant to be broad a little
more generic and uh not as specific code is where we get uh specific into
implementation and things but uh this gives uh staff in the city and even
planning commission a directive of what kind of the city's um goals and policies
are how they want to address certain issues.
Uh and then just to kind of u explain the connection to title 14. So, um, like
I said, this is kind of, uh, the overall basis for implementing those, uh,
policies with relation to allowing people a variety of housing types or
things like an ADU or or
housing. Um,
and then wanted to mention as well, so like I said, most of the comprehensive
plan is uh pretty much going to be the same. We're really incorporating a lot
of the existing data in a more clear and functional way that we can um get
through to compliance. We all are so also updating the uh land capacity
analysis to make sure that uh before we were showing a gap or a deficit in
housing that we were planning for which is really a no no go um you do have to
have a solution for how you're going to address those gaps and plan forward. So,
um, and so, uh, going forward when we bring
drafts to the planning commission, uh, these are kind of the main things that
we're looking for from you is really, um, and we'll provide you kind of like
an outline of the housing action plan with, of course, the full version. uh
and then also the draft updates that we're doing and try to connect those for
you so that it's a little more clear about how we're implementing um that
into the the copyright plan update. So, um yeah, just making sure that um
do you think that those uh what we're the changes that we are making are clear
enough to um I guess implement that housing
and just further steps for that. So, we'll continue through planning
commission review. Uh we're still working through some initial um
revisions for that update. Uh we should have I believe by next meeting a draft
available for you to uh dig into and take a look at and uh feel free to reach
out and ask any questions. Uh happy to make staff hours available and whatnot.
So uh we'll also be initiating the environmental review process as well.
Yeah. And that's that's it. >> Okay. Thank you, Morgan. Any questions
from commission?
» Okay. So, uh next next is the title 14 discussion regarding density and
heights. We will now hear from city staff.
» Can you reopen the one that's in the folder the plan?
Uh, would you hear me? >> Sorry. Beating that hearing. My
apologies. >> Yes.
» Yeah, it's still refresh. >> No, we did. I I had a typo.
So, um, oh wait, not the design standards
title 14. We appreciate your patience as we work
through
Sorry. Here we go.
» Yay. All right. So, this is a presentation that I gave last week at
city council. Um, so I want to present it to the planning commission. Uh, next
slide, please. Um, I can't remember who all I've given this spiel to, so if
you've heard it already, you get through it again. Um when the King County land
capacity calculations were done, it was really looking at um the analogy we came
up with is that each property is like a passenger van. The size of the property
along with its setbacks um and other dimensional restrictions um create the
size of the the passenger van. And however many seats you cram into that
passenger van is its uh its density, its capacity. So what we have to do with
these capacity analysis is to show that we can cram all these little airplane
seats into um these passenger vans. But that doesn't mean anyone would actually
want to. Someone could do big cushion captain chairs
within that passenger van. Um and that's allowed and that's fine. Uh
we just have to show the capacity is there for smaller seats even if it's not
feasible for someone to actually build it because of land
economics or demand or whatever it is. We just have to show it's possible. So
that's where the capacity is. So it really is sort of just doing a
mathematical exercise to show that those little seats could fit if anyone ever
really really wanted to even though they might not. So that's where we're at with
the the when we talk about the capacity numbers. Next slide please.
So um
so when the capacity analysis was done by Burke back in December um so there's
a memo that we keep referring to the Burke memo um where they had to do math
to show basic capacity and they had to assume a number they had to use a number
to do math. Um and so the number that they used for uh the zoning districts
was 20 30 17 17 and 21 dwelling units per acre to show the math. And with
those numbers it show that we have capacity.
So we don't need to have minimums in there to show that that capacity is
within that passenger pan. the capacity is there whether or not we have those
bookends on these numbers. So we went back through the Burke memo. Um we went
back through the um the work that had been sent to the
consultant BHC that did our initial drafts written up the initial drafts of
the title 14 updates. It turned out they had used the numbers
from the calculations to that they thought they needed to do at the minimum
densities, but they weren't needed. So, the city engineer who's much better at
math than I am, we went through all the numbers and she was able to verify and
we got confirmation that we don't need to have density minimums in the MT
Midtown, Oldtown, Uptown, and commercial zoning districts. So, we are proposing
that those numbers come out and there's just no minimum density. Um, if someone
wants to build something, they can. They're not required to.
» Um, and so, and because Oldtown is such uh geographically um a small portion of
the city, we don't need to have higher building
heights to meet our land use capacity. So, we are proposing when we presented
to council, hey council, why don't we just not change the height in Oldtown
and only do slight building height adjustments for Midtown and Uptown and
then um because commercial zoning district is along the more southern
portion of um Main Street and then onto Big Rock Road, that's where it's more
appropriate to have u mixeduse development. where you can have um like
a solid um well-designed commercial height tenant space with, you know,
three floors above it. Um and and but that's all contained within like one
portion of town. It's not going into the neighborhoods. It's along main street.
Um and it's consolidated. Um so that was a discussion that we had at city
council. Um so this is something that's being noodled on. I would like you guys
to noodle on it also. Um, and if there's,
you know, if planning commission wants to have any
discussion about these numbers, uh, we may we may do so, but we're looking to
not um make drastic changes um to those zoning districts and
effectively no changes to Oldtown. Next slide, please.
So the only change that we were looking at for Oldtown um was changing the
minimum lot size from 2500 ft to zero. This is
common in general. Um and I I checked with all
of our neighboring jurisdictions. So Monroe, Carnation,
Northbend, um Isiqua, Redmond, none of them
bought the Langville. I checked a lot of zoning uh ordinances in non-residential
zoning districts. There's not a minimum lot size. There are minimum lot
dimensions. The 25 ft or the minimum lot width that is fairly common as a minimum
um but not as a lot size. So this would be fairly standard. And so we were only
proposing this as a way for because these older buildings are expensive to
maintain. Um, the idea was to provide as much
flexibility to those historic building property owners if there's something
that they could sell off to their neighbor, do a boundary line adjustment,
do a whatever, so that they can get some some
money out of land that they're not using so that way they can help maintain and
preserve their buildings. That was the idea behind changing that one um part of
the of the development standards for Oldtown. Next slide, please.
And then as we were doing this, double-checking all the math, um we
looked at the residential densities because there had been some questions
about um initial drafts had R8 with a maximum density of 15,
which I didn't really understand when I first got here, but I had sort of
trusted what the consultant had done, but we decided to double check
everything anyways and decided, oh, we don't need those higher numbers, the the
eight dwelling units per acre to match the zoning district. That was what was
in the calculations done by Burke when they did the land use capacity. So we
brought all of those um down to reflect the zoning district. And so for
residential zoning districts like this, the common practice is that the number
reflects the maximum density allowed within that zone. So that's what we have
um here. And so this is what staff is uh is now recommending um and is going to
going to be presented formally in writing to plan to city
council next week. Um so please watch attend checkout agendas.
Um and there will be more discussions next Tuesday. Um
no that's okay. Go to the next go to the next slide. So this is the slide that
I've I've brought before at least city council. I don't know if you have I
shown you guys this slide. >> So this was me being curious about how
Duval regulates and measures height.
Um uh on a hill. We're on a hill. We're on
a we're on a hilly island. Um so on the left is Duvall.
We I and I don't know why our code is written this way, but we measure to the
eve of the building and then you can have a sloped roof up from there. So in
this illustrated diagram, I took an imaginary
property on a slope, put in some property lines, and then the same height
limit. It doesn't really matter what the number is, but I was going for what
would look like 35 ft. Um, with a a you know
two and a half story building um what would that look like? So left is Duvall.
Some cities go in the middle. Some cities take the average elevation of
where a building is placed and then they go up from there to their height limit
and then the height limit is a horizontal plane from there. And so you
can end up with something that's kind of boxy on the lower hill side.
Some communities want that and that's fine for them. Um on the right is the
hype limit and other cities do this where you basically measure along a
slope and then that sort of requires um a a building to be more within the
topography. Um I am more used to the rightmost height
measurements. These height regulations have been
something that staff has sort of kicked around and updating but required as part
of this code work. But I do feel like there would be a lot of value for city
council to consider directing staff to have us do this work. Um, so
I'm going to be bringing this up again to city council and asking them if they
want to consider as soon as we have to get through all these mandated code
amendments before the end of the year. So as soon as we get through these,
could I please start on this so that way it's all, you know, as close together as
possible. Um, so I kind of want just want to give you a heads up. Um, and
whenever we get to a public hearing, whenever we do finally get to a
recommendation, you could, if you want, if you have it
as part of motion and we can verify it in writing that
uh you could in theory say the planning
commission recommends adoption of this ordinance of whatever and also for city
council to direct staff to do ABC subsequently.
if planning commission so uh so I'm planting the seed.
Um next slide. So if planning commission has any
questions
if you go back few slides >> to which one?
» Uh yeah this one. Wait. Um >> can you go one more?
» One more. Sorry. Yeah this one. Okay. So um what I wanted to see is I know you're
this is the proposed right. So can we also see what is current? I think that
was one of the asked during our workshop >> the frame. Uh yeah like what do we have
currently >> currently what do we have
» and if somebody is going to make a change you know like if you're proposing
like for example if you take the you remember how I think I don't know I
forgot the name of the person who was asking this
» but if you're changing from R4 to R8 >> you know can we give an example of what
an R4 will look like >> and then what do we currently have and
then what is it going to >> so there there was a request for
renderings of each iteration of what's allowed now and each iteration of what
would be allowed under the proposed regulations.
» Yeah. >> Um staff doesn't have this
I don't think we have we don't have proper design software. It's expensive
» and it's time consuming >> to do all of those. I would love to have
» Yeah. But at least for the main street. >> Oh, but but for for Oldtown, if we're
not proposing to change Oldtown, then there's nothing.
» It would be the same picture. >> So So with So if
» the current standards are on there, so >> we'll go to the next the next slide has
the >> Yeah.
» Um so for Oldtown specifically, >> yeah,
» these are all existing in the middle and then proposed on the right. So nothing
would be changing. So those rendering pictures of what's possible would be the
city. >> Yeah.
» I'm just curious like the minimum lot size.
» That was a question. You have a minimum lot to exist that
subscribes
that is the access requirements because each lot to be a legal lot you have to
have access to that lot. And so that's what really drives that 25 ft of at
least having some kind of minimum there for that. And that that's my
understanding of why we have that. Um and and the idea what's most likely um
to happen because because the lots in Oldtown are very small. Um and the 25 ft
reflects the historic loting pattern from 1911
or when whenever the the the first class for for downtown Dubal were created were
25 wide lost. So that's sort of a even a historic number that has always been
there. Um, so, so what would be most likely to
happen is that you would have two adjacent properties and if you have an
existing older building with no parking and nothing else, it's already legal
non-conforming. So, if you have a back portion of your lot that you're not
using and it's already not parking, to not have that property
doesn't put your building anymore out of conformant because your building's
already grandfathered. But if you have a property next to you
that wants to maybe put in some parking or maybe do a, you know, an outside
patio or or do an addition or do a little um
there's been chatter about having um better places to have like food truck
gatherings. having that sort of ability where it
wouldn't be really um as much of lot splits as just boundary line adjustments
so that properties could shift to adjacent owners and that but whomever
has the the older buildings you still have to meet building code. So, if you
have a historic or an older building and you want to do a boundary line
adjustment to sell some part of your property to your neighbor, you still
have to have a your the new property line a minimum distance away from the
building depending on the construction of the building for fire safety
purposes. So, there's still those sort of regulations that would come into
effect. So, it's not like something would be be on a property line all the
way around. So that wouldn't quite happen, but it just wouldn't be less
grandfathered in than it already is. Am I
» commercial? >> Um, Oldtown is mixed. What Oldtown what
we are proposing is commercial and then um residential would be allowed above
ground floor commercial. Um, so if someone wanted to have like an
apartment over their shop or or whatever, that would still be allowable.
» Yeah. You have to meet the 25 or the 35. >> I mean, it seems like the minimum there
you get. >> Well, if you if you already have an
existing lot, you don't have to worry about your lot. But
» this is just if you're changing lot boundaries.
» Yeah. But the mass on building height would be
still be 35 ft. >> Oh, sure.
» There is just wonder to do that.
You got a minimum on that width and Oh, it's just width and height. Okay. Okay.
So, I was thinking depth, too. I'm like, well, then you're going to have to be at
least 875 ft or so square feet. But I was reading that height is depth.
» Oh, okay. Okay. Gotcha.
» Yeah. >> Anything else from staff?
» No. No. I just think um uh the none is what's existing.
Just clarify. The none is what's existing and the 35 ft is what's
existing. So we're proposing keeping >> get rid of the pink.
» Yeah. um
keep 35 in old town, do uh small increases to empty UT and then 10 ft in
the commercial but and yeah and then city council will
be discussing this further and then hopefully in the near future
um we'll finally have everything done enough
to after some more discussion with title public hearing but that's still going to
be couple months
Any other questions? Okay.
Um, is the design stand?
» Okay.
» I don't need the procedural uh switch.
Okay. So um in our very lengthy title 14 we have a chapter on design standards.
So development standards are limitations of the physical placement of a structure
building on a on a property how tall how big if there's a flurry ratio if there's
a limit to imperous surface things like that. So it's what is the bulletin
placement of the building. The design standards are what does it look like?
How does it interact with the public interface? Um does it have articulation?
Um or is it allowed by right to be ugly? We've all not allowed our right to be
ugly. Um so uh next slide please. So there was a Senate bill that was passed
last year that said hey cities I'm paraphrasing. Hey cities if you have
design guidelines they can no longer be guidelines. They need to be standard.
They need to be objective. And someone needs to be able to read them and say,
"Yes, I meet the standard or no, I do not." So, it has to be clear and
objective. And our current regulations are more like guidelines and
it says you should do this or you should do that. And so, we're taking all the
should out. Although, please look in the draft, see if we missed any. Um,
take the should out. do that. You must have articulation. You must have
whatever sloping for your roof. You must have windows. Fenestration is a fancy
word for window. To defenistenate does not mean to remove windows.
So just um so so it has to be objective and it has to be done now. We have to do
this this year. Um next slide please. So the approach we did um so words are
important. We now will have standards and not guidelines.
The current chapter is a little disorganized. It's a little messy and
it's a little long-winded. So we're going to be reorganizing it.
We're going to try and make it more concise, easier to implement, easier to
have applicants understand it, easier for staff to find conformance
um with uh this code. Um, and also to more clearly set up expectations of
developers because I don't know how many times a developer has come in with their
little napkin sketch that does not look fantastic and they claim like, "Oh, but
I thought this is what you wanted." No. So, we're going to have lots of
illustrations to establish what the community actually wants so that they
can't claim they didn't know unless they're legally blind, they're going to
know. So, that's that's the goal.
So, um there's illustrations that are going to
be throughout this chapter. So, we're first going to be um having as as most
of you as most of you can see in the draft um there's building types by
zoning district like what the intended types are and then after that we have um
a reference to the development standards. So, and there is caveat
language that anything that's in the other development standards chapter if
there's a conflict that information prevails. um but to give people an
understanding of where exactly are these setbacks and how would you place
something on a site. We're trying to spoon feed what we want as best as
possible. And then also further examples within
the design standards uh sections of what we mean by articulation and setting
things back and what we want for dormers and what we want for breaking up the
facade of a building. So, as many pictures as we can cram into this thing.
And we have confirmed we can't do color photos or color pictures. So, these
won't all be black and white. So, we're very excited about that because we're
dorky. We like colors and municipal codes. Next slide, please.
So, um a part of these design standards are how they are administered,
when do they apply, what is exempt. So, you don't have to answer right now,
but if you could please get back to me in the next week or so, so that way we
can I can modify these things. Um, is when
when are they applicable? We're saying right now we're saying all new
development, which includes single family. [clears throat]
» If that feels like overreach that maybe single family shouldn't be under these
regulations, give me feedback. Um, should this only
apply in certain zoning districts? Maybe it doesn't apply to R4, R six, and R8.
That's an option. Um, right now we we decided to throw all the spaghetti on
the wall. So, right now, we have it drafted to apply to everything. Um,
there are some exemptions if if you're remodeling the inside of your house,
like you're redoing your kitchen. I don't I don't want to have to do design
standards for your kitchen remodel. So, if it's inside, I don't want to have to
worry about it. I'm sure staff also doesn't want to have to worry about it.
And then if you're doing any exterior replacement in kind repairs, if it
already looks a certain way and it's still going to look the same way, but
it's better, newer materials, that's fine. I'm not going to have
someone redesign their house because they need to do new sighting. Um
so so these considerations for you um
as you as you read through the draft let me know um next slide please.
So more administration right now there's a process called departure requests. So
we talked about them with some of the design review items and that's where the
director can wave design requirements if certain criteria are met which sounds
good on paper because you can't you can't for cast every single possible
project that might come in the door but right now there is no appeal process.
There's no checks or balances to it. I like having
checks and balances on me. And so, do you want to keep you can keep the
process as is? And you could trust me, I'm human. I'm also not immortal. I'm
not going to be here alive forever. So, I don't know what the next person's
going to be like. Um, you can keep the the current process and I'll just deal
with it. That's fine. It's my job. Um or it could be the design review board
makes a decision that and staff makes a recommendation to you. It could be I
make an administrative decision and it's appealable to the design review board.
Um so these are questions I would like answers to. How involved do you want to
be? Do you just want it to be on appeal because something wasn't reasonable and
appealable by the applicant? Appealable by the public? It wouldn't matter.
Um, next slide, please.
And in doing this work,
I love how complicated all of this gets. There were sections in our permit
processing chapter that talked about design review
um that I learned about today or yesterday.
that we have different types of design review.
That type one and two land use applications are reviewed
administratively. Whereas type threes which are subdivisions, site uh site
plan, site, >> conditional use permits, those are type
threes. They come to planning commission and those would need to be the design
review board would then act on the the design of those buildings.
Um this language is not very clear
about um any appeal like should there be
um so
this isn't something that's in our policy window to change but with a
recommendation to city council when these code amendments come through could
be a recommendation of city council should also direct staff to clean this
up um if the planning commission. Uh next
slide please. So if you could give me feedback on the
design standards on the questions that we asked and we
can email those slides so that you don't have to use your photographic memory. um
it would be greatly appreciated and just like all the other things that we have
to get done by the end of the year. Um, this item will be presented to city
council next week and then through September and October, we're going to
try to work out the wrinkles and then have it uh ready to go for adoption
November trying to trying to get things adopted before December so that we have
a little bit of cushion and it's not so it's at the 10th hour instead of the
11th. So, um, next slide
and I'm here for any questions.
Um, sorry. I I think the main one from there that we need direction on is the
thing about the design departures. That's a that's a big one for staff.
Yes. because it is it's one that we see a concern with in our current code that
we would like to or we think plan commission should should maybe have be
more involved in that process just as part of our recommendation after but
what we know like applicants asked for in that process to have some kind of
oversight over that that's what
» yeah can you say a little more about the pros and cons of like how we're doing it
now and maybe what you're ask I'm I think I'm a little lo confused about
what the question is. So with departure request,
if an applicant feels that they can't meet um some component of the design
standards, they only want their foot their commercial facade to have 50%
windows instead of 60% windows. um if it's just because they don't want
to versus they can't because this is the
only place where they can put um an elevator for ADA requirements
like those are different reasons to not meet that standard. So, if it's um
so if it's a quote unquote good reason, that feels reasonable. But if it's not,
they just don't want to and I I agree and I'm like, "Okay, you don't want to.
No problem. Let me just sign that off." There's no there's no one that says,
"Hey, they didn't have a good reason. You need to reconsider that." So that's
why staff right now it's just under staff and we can have all of these
really great regulations on design and if the director just waves away all of
those requirements um then what's the point of those of
those regulations? So having putting some more checks and balances I I'm
basically trying to take away power that's been assigned to my position.
» Yeah. And I I can clarify maybe a little bit too because in the past so we we
typically include the departure requests that are recommended in our staff report
when you are design review board. So we're putting the departure request in
the staff report but
technically that is not a planning commission decision now it's a director
decision. So, us putting in the departure request
is basically simply a courtesy or um kind offormational
moment. That make a little more sense to me.
» Yeah. If it's okay for me to ask a follow-up question. Um how often is this
happening? Is this like every week or is this like a couple times a year?
So we've we've since I started March 30th, we've only had two projects come
forward to the planning commission and the design review board. So we have
Acres of Diamond and the Jane Society. Um did Acres of Diamond have departure
requests? >> Yeah.
» Yeah. >> Yeah.
And it's it's pretty common for uh projects to have departure requests um
for a variety of reasons. >> There's typically something that it
makes it difficult for them to meet every single design guideline. So I I do
agree that it's good to have something that's a relief valve,
but the way it's administered so that the director, you know, doesn't lose
their mind and like has no standards, right? Like I don't I don't want that
for the city. Um, so
that's where that's why we want um the the planning commission to to consider
this. Um, but if you think it's working fine and
» well, if it's okay, I'm no, I can't really see if I'm getting called on or
not, but my my the things I think um maybe are in like the tradeoffs that I
could imagine here are just a lot more meetings that the applicant has to
attend with all of their design staff. And I guess I'm interested in making
sure we're not adding unnecessary cost to potential especially like affordable
housing projects in this city. So that sounds to me like while we might want to
avoid some really ugly things and I agree with that, I also don't want there
to be a bunch of unnecessary process. So those are my comments and you can answer
if you want to or not.
Um, okay. Cool. Yeah, I I agree with what you're saying. Uh,
time is money and when you're building something. So, I agree. Well,
» I completely agree with what uh Terry was saying as well. Um, and my current
I'm also agreeing with Dr. Brady and I but I don't really have a a problem with
the way we're doing it now. My biggest problem, well my biggest problem is
someone that is not you. >> You know the opposite problem. Someone
who doesn't approve anything represent absolutely not. And we don't we're not
have no flexibility and then there's no people. That's much more troublesome to
me. Um but to have an applicant um you know me I want to see the world's
gone. So but so to have an applicant have to go through another step I don't
want to avoid either. But I also don't want um it siloed in in the in the in
the stack. So an option would be if there is something that goes through
administrative review could be the decision of the director that could then
be appealed to the design review board and then for anything that would be
decided on by the design review board the staff could make a recommendation on
the department >> and that way it shouldn't most of the
time probably would not add more product >> and they can and the applicant could
choose to appeal it or not. >> Exactly. So they can it would be so be
appealed based on the rules or and you'd still you still could approve request if
you wanted to or recommend approval >> right
» but uh if you said no you can't have it you don't want you know you have to have
60% windows let's say you say example and uh you and they say no I need to be
50% you say no this is what it is they can then choose to appeal or not they
can choose to go forward with the with Right.
» And and so if it's a recommendation where then staff said, "I don't
recommend this 50%." Um but at the design and review board, then the the
planning commission could decide we're fine with the 50%. Or we're, you know,
and and then the planning commission as design review board could be the
ultimate. Would in that case of of a denial and an appeal, would the um city
act as a the prosecuting side or would you provide a defense and a rebuttal or
would it be an applicant coming to us this is what I would like to do?
» So it would be so anything that would need to go through the design review
board. Oh, so if it's an administrative review and and
um staff recommends or or you know approves some and not others and the
applicant wants those others approved then they decide to come to the appeal
review board then staff would be saying we we approved these because of these
reasons. We didn't approve these because of these reasons. The applicant as
appellent could then state their case and then the planning commission could
decide as they seek it. Well, we did have a GB model like sorry
put it like a limit on process that you should take and the number of times an
hour get >> um I
I don't think we would need to limit >> my point is like we an applicant should
not be like left hanging they don't get an answer but like the process itself is
like take so much time that extendable. >> So if an applicant and the staff are at
an impass um
and because right now if if that says no then
um the applicant might try something else and then staff says no that we
might try something else. Whereas if there was an appeal to the planning
commission/design review board, then all of it would be brought and then that
decision would be made by the planning commission
and it's it's it would be your decision. That's fine. I would support whatever
you approve and then we would just make sure it gets implemented. Um so it in so
both ways like the applicant could say I want to go right now to the design
review board. It's what I have. Let's go. Okay, that's your due process. Let
go and then we'd be here for you to make a decision and then we could finish up
with, you know, the other nuts and bolts of a project to get it through.
» Isn't that isn't there a new state mandate uh saying that there's a maximum
number or maximum length of time >> there are feature? So that would also
apply to these applications. If there's mutual agreement by the staff uh by the
city and the applicant to have additional time, that's that's fine. And
then it it's whatever the time ended up being. Um the that shot clock is to a
decision. So if they're so if an applicant comes in with an
application where they are not conforming with whatever standards,
design standards, development standards, use conditions, excuse me. Um
and we keep going back and forth. You need to update this. You need to change
this. You need to provide us more information. They don't do it. They
don't do it. At that point, if we've hit that shot clock, okay, applicant, you
have not performed. I cannot find your project in conformance. I have to deny
your project and then it gets denied and I've met the conditions of the law as
far as that chaka goes. Um >> yeah, and on the flip side, if they're
working with us well and they're providing they're making those
provisions that we're requesting, then it's on us to make sure that like we are
we are still making sure we're in compliance with that the clock. Um, so
it's also a motivation for us to move relatively quickly on our side by
review. >> Yes.
» And I don't know if this is what Commissioner Chapel you were referring
to, but we also can only hold one design review meeting.
Yeah, actually I saw that on one of them.
That's um
a detachment to applic >> to just have one or
» Well, I mean, it's one design review for a project,
not for a request, right? So, they have to bundle all their requests, all their
departure requests into a single thing. and if something's uncovered later,
they've used their design review appeal up.
» Um, generally when it comes to like conceptual architectural designs, um,
once you're ready to go through to present like you, you know what your
project's going to be. There are in practically every single project once
you go to construction documents, there might be something that shifts a little
bit or tweaks a little bit or you know whatever it is and and
we are allowed to legally find something in substantial compliance. So if those
windows were at 60% of the wall and then energy code calculations come in,
they're like we have to make it 59. Okay, that's substantially incompliant.
Like that's fine. So, so life allows us to account for those sort of like minor
tweaks. What? Because you're not doing construction documents when you come.
You don't do that. You do the architectural plans. So,
that's fine.
» Any other questions? Is there a way to make it appealable
to us without the formal designation of a designer review board? Like we just
want to pres just see what you know get your buy in before we go to the full
design review board. >> Um,
no. >> They're still going before planning
commission to the planning commission as a as a separate agenda item. So I don't
know if the only thing I could think of is if there were
uh so this would be a future work plan item to come up with some sort of
process >> where it would be
could a preapp a pre-application so this wouldn't kick in yet
could get informal feedback from a review board
could make we make the recommendations to the design board just give initial
feedback. You know what I you know I don't know if other cities do that. I
don't know what that code language would look like, but it's something where um
so >> girl, they don't want to see the
» preamp. Well, and and we're stepping on and
we're stepping on commissioner and >> design hopefully. How about this? This
is me being optimistic. Hopefully, our design standards are clear enough
» and objective objective, not objectionable. Objective
enough that it would be relatively straightforward for a a
architect to say, I see all your illustrations. I see your clear
language. I know what the city wants. I'm going to design it accordingly and
we are going to get through lift squid and I just have minor um deviation
requests because I have to put this elevator here or I have to put this um
you know ramp here or whatever it is >> and and we can work through it quickly.
So that's that's my my hope. >> We have the deviation request. We have
the deviation request actually to not request or Yeah. Departure request to uh
not to not comply with the city code, but they wanted to do something extra on
top of it that no one asked for. It was like a
» It's like a giant shipping container built thing. You remember this? Somebody
came in. It was somebody wanting to actually get rid of this feature.
This was only a month ago. >> Oh, this is the daycare. We're Yeah,
» the daycare. Yes. It's a weird departure request, but like the person coming in
had bought the project from them didn't want to do the feature and we found out
it was a departure request to do the feature anyway because the applicant
wanted to do it at the time. >> It was never something we required.
» Yeah. >> So, so if someone through their through
their construction documents figures out I can do something without this
departure request that was approved, that's also fine.
Um yeah, the shipping container. That's right. Okay. Sorry.
» Um any other question? >> So any any feedback on any of it um by
the next week would be fantastic. >> Thank you so much. And hopefully we'll
get you a computer that works. >> So
that's what I'm planning. >> Okay. We'll be Yeah. And I can I'll
write up also as to what happened. Thank you.
» Okay. Thank you, staff. Uh item nine is new business. Seeing that we have none,
we'll move on to item 10, unfinished business. Do we have
any? >> Oh, thanks, sir. Okay. Uh let's just
move on to adjournment. Uh before we adjourn, uh just want to make a reminder
that next meeting is September 9th, 2026, 6 p.m. here. Uh, anything further
for the commission or to the commission for tonight?
» I think so. Um, if if I may. Um, it I I think I want to address some of the
items brought up by the community members. Um,
I can't speak for the rest of the council, but
I am of a very similar lifeline to people that spoke today. And uh, I have
been frustrated by um
the niceness of of of
maybe it's not maybe I'm just I'm just a horrible person. But there's things we
don't say and I I don't say them either and I don't think other people say them
because there's it's just not who to say. Um we're also frustrated by the uh
when the state makes a mandate, it comes with
threats. That's probably the wrong word to use. Uh there is the potential of a
city that doesn't come into compliance with the state mandate to be sued. That
could cost us a lot of money. There's also a worse thing that being sued and
that's coming into uh ownership. Not what's the word?
There's a word for it where they it's like receiverhip from the state and they
come in and they decide what our rules are. Is that the right word? That's not
the right word. There there are >> sometimes there are there are state
legislations that get adopted that say if you cities don't adopt your own
versions of of these regulations that are tailored for your city the state
regulations apply >> they'll invalidate parts of our
conference >> and they will invalidate. Yeah. Um so it
the most charitable view of of uh us and city council um that has the real power
uh is that there it's just wanting being a quiet um
the thing that sparked a lot interest I'm I'm going on too long I'll try to
wrap up thing that sparked that Facebook that sparked uh the uh the whole
interest in these planning questions It's it wasn't really fair. Um I'm a
real estate agent. I come from the development side. We they just don't
want to do things that don't fit with the city. It's not good business
practice. I can I can draw a horrible, ugly, disgusting building that nobody
would put on Main Street that is perfectly compliance and they can't uh
nobody's going to do that. That's just not in the best interest of the owner of
that property. And that's really my philosophy when I look at all these
things. What's the best interest of the the owner of property and secondarily
what's the best interest of the community? Um there's third or fourth
tank. So it's not a priority. But um I I just want you to know we have the same
frustration and we have a hard time balancing that. I know I do. There are
certain things that I want the city to be that I may or may not say because not
every wants. Right now you guys are are seemed pretty unified with what you're
talking about. That's not the case with everybody. Um
» I think I think that's that's good. It's just it's a it's a top a top uh problem
we have. And just because we bu we zone it and say you we can do this here that
meets in many cases meets the what the state's asking us to do. It's still on
the builders the the people developers to come and and do that. And as we've
seen they have very little interest in building low-inccome housing.
And again, low income housing, when you hear those words, that's $600, $700,000.
» Most of us are not even concerned about the low-inccome housing. We realize the
importance of it and are willing to accept that within uh
acceptable standards. Um but I think we also know
that um that this is being mandated by the state and this was mandated before
co happened with tremendous growth from the tech industry
and co changed all of that >> and I sorry
» you're right >> I'm so sorry we don't have a public
comment >> section but it talk
Um so so we welcome everybody to come to city council. There'll be more chance
for public testimony. Please come and and speak. Um there's always public
comment at our planning commission uh meetings as well. Um
the it's already going to be September next
week. No. So, September 1st, um the updated
draft of the title 14 code changes will be posted online and um then I will be
able to update the web this the city web pages where I've been linking all the
things. So, once they're presented in the council agenda, I'll be able to post
all the updated information. So everybody,
it'll coming soon.
» Yeah. Uh I want to say something too. I mean it kind of reminds me of an analogy
I heard years ago. It's like how do you make a pair of shoes last a really long
time? Do you buy expensive shoes? Do you only wear those good shoes when you need
to? Or do you repair them when they need repair? And the answer is all. So this
the height stuff the jam-packing density in. I mean it's it's a portion but it's
not it. So it's it's kind of more of a big big picture everybody has to look
at. So that's all I got to say. >> Thank you so much for coming in. Great.
» Uh I'll I'll adjourn the meeting. Anybody else have anything?
» No. Let's go ahead and adjourn. 7:22. >> Thanks so much.