>>> GOOD MORNING, THE JUNE
23rd, 2023 OF THEWILL COME TO
ORDER.
I AM DAN STRAUSS WITH THE QUICK
CALL OF ROLE.
>> COUNCILMEMBER LEWIS?
>> PRESENT.
>> COUNCILMEMBER JURAREZ,
COUNCILMEMBER MOSQUEDA?
>> PRESENT.
>> THANK YOU.
>>> THE LAND USE AND
NEIGHBORHOODS COMMITTEE BEGINS
OUR MEETINGS WITH ELLIOTT
ACKNOWLEDGMENT . WE ARE ON THE
TRADITIONAL AND ANCESTRAL LANDS
OF THE FIRST PEOPLE OF THIS
REGION , PAST AND PRESENT,
REPRESENTED IN A NUMBER OF
TRIBES IN THE U.S. IN HONOR OF
GRATITUDE OF THE LAND ITSELF
AND THE PEOPLE OF THIS LAND, WE
BEGIN WITH THIS ACKNOWLEDGMENT
TO RECOGNIZE THE FACT WE ARE
GUESTS ON THIS LAND AND SHOULD
STEWARD OUR LAND AS SUCH, AS
GUESTS.
STARTING OUR MEETINGS WITH
ACKNOWLEDGMENT IS NOT A
CHECKLIST OR ROAD BEHAVIOR.
THIS DOES NOT GIVE US A
PASSPORT TO PROCEED HOWEVER WE
DESIRE.
AND WE MUST STEWARD OUR WORK AS
GUESTS AT OUR TIME HERE IS BOTH
AS ELECTED OFFICIALS IN ON THIS
EARTH IS SHORT, SO WE TAKE THIS
MOMENT TO PAUSE AND ACKNOWLEDGE
THE FIRST PEOPLE OF THIS REGION
PAST AND PRESENT.
>>> WE HAVE THE ITEMS ON THE
AGENDA TODAY, PUBLIC HEARING, A
VOTE WHICH PROVIDES LAND-USE
FLEXIBILITY TO AFFORDABLE
HOUSING DEVELOPMENTS ON
RELIGIOUS INSTITUTION LANDS, A
BRIEFING AND VOTE ON 10126,
LANDMARK ORDINANCE FOR THE BODO
HOUSE ON CAPITOL HILL, AND THE
BRIEFING THE SEATTLE DEPARTMENT
OF CONSTRUCTION ON THE
QUARTERLY PERMITTING REPORT.
WE PREVIOUSLY PLANNED TO HEAR
FROM OP CD TODAY REGARDING THE
RACIAL EQUITY REPORT THAT WILL
HELP INFORM THE COMPREHENSIVE
PLAN, MAJOR UPDATE PROCESS.
THAT PRESENTATION HAS
UNFORTUNATELY BEEN DELAYED, AND
WE WILL EXPECT TO HEAR IT AS
SOON AS POSSIBLE.
HOPEFULLY, WE WILL HAVE TIME
FOR IT IN JULY.
>>> THE NEXT MEETING OF THE
LAND USE AND NEIGHBORHOODS
COMMITTEE WILL BE WEDNESDAY,
JULY 14th STARTING AT 9:30 A.M.
. BEFORE WE BEGIN, IF THERE'S
NO OBJECTION, THE AGENDA WILL
BE ADOPTED.
HEARING NO OBJECTION, THE
AGENDAS ADOPTED.
>>> WE OPENED THE REMOTE
COMMENT PERIOD FOR TATE'S ITEMS
ON THE AGENDA.
BEFORE WE BEGIN, I ASK EVERYONE
TO BE PATIENT AS WE OPERATE THE
SYSTEM IN REAL TIME.
WHILE IT REMAINS OUR STRONG
INTENT TO HAVE COMMENTS, THE
CITY COUNCIL DOES RESERVE THE
RIGHT TO END THIS PUBLIC
HEARING COMMENTS AT ANY POINT.
I WILL MODERATE THE PUBLIC
COMMENT PERIOD IN THE FOLLOWING
MANNER.
PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD FOR THIS
TIME IS UP TO 10 MINUTES.
EACH SPEAKER WILL BE GIVEN TWO
MINUTES TO SPEAK.
I WILL CALL ON EACH SPEAKER BY
NAME AND THE ORDER WHICH THEY
ARE REGISTERED ON THE COUNCIL'S
WEBSITE. IF YOU HAVE NOT
REGISTERED TO SPEAK AND WOULD
LIKE TO, YOU CAN SIGN UP FOR
THE ENTER PUBLIC COMMENT, WHICH
IS ALSO LISTED ON TODAY'S
AGENDA.
THE PUBLIC COMMENT CALL IN LINE
IS DIFFERENT THAN THE LISTEN
LINE, SO PLEASE BE AWARE OF
THAT AND BE SURE YOU DO NOT MIX
THE TWO PHONE NUMBERS.
ONCE I CALLED THE SPEAKER'S
NAME, STAFF WILL MUTE THE
APPROPRIATE MICROPHONE AND THE
PROMPT WILL BE YOUR UNMUTED.
AT THAT TIME, YOU MUST PRESS
STAR SIX, NOT POUND SIX.
STAR SIX.
PLEASE BEGIN BY SPEAKING BY
STATING YOUR NAME AND THE ITEM
IN WHICH YOU ARE ADDRESSING.
SPEAKERS WILL HEAR A CHIME WHEN
10 SECONDS ARE LEFT OF THE
ALLOTTED TIME. ONCE THE SPEAKER
HERE IS THE TIME, WE ASK YOU
WRAP UP YOUR PUBLIC COMMENTS.
IF SPEAKERS DO NOT END WITHIN
THE ALLOTTED TIME PROVIDED, THE
SPEAKER'S MICROPHONE WILL BE
MUTED AFTER 10 SECONDS TO ALLOW
US TO CALL ON THE NEXT SPEAKER.
ONCE YOU'VE COMPLETED PUBLIC
COMMENT, WE ASK YOU PLEASE
DISCONNECT FROM THE LINE IF YOU
PLAN TO CALL A THIS MEETING, THE
DO SO BY THE LISTENING OPTIONS
LISTED IN THE AGENDA.
THERE IS A SEPARATE PUBLIC
HEARING FOR ITEM ONE, COUNCIL
BILL 120081, THE RELIGIOUS
INSTITUTION AFFORDABLE HOUSING
BILL , SO PLEASE RESERVE ANY
COMMENT ABOUT THAT LEGISLATION
FOR THE PUBLIC HEARING, WHICH
WILL OCCUR DIRECTLY AFTER THE
PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD.
IF YOU HAVE MIXED UP WHICH
PUBLIC HEARING OR PUBLIC
COMMENT YOU HAVE INTENDED TO
SIGN UP FOR, PLEASE JUST NOTE
AT THE BEGINNING OF YOUR
COMMENTS, AND WE WILL GET YOU
IN THE RIGHT PLACE.
PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD IS NOW
OPEN, AND WE WILL BEGIN WITH
THE FIRST SPEAKER ON THE LIST.
AND I AM LOOKING AT THE PUBLIC
COMMENT LIST.
I SEE FOLKS IN GREEN LISTED FOR
THE PUBLIC HEARING.
I AM CHECKING MY ASSUMPTIONS
THAT I SHOULD WAIT TO CALL ON
THOSE INDIVIDUALS ONCE WE OPEN
THE PUBLIC HEARING, IS THAT
CORRECT?
>> AFFIRMATIVE.
WE ARE PUBLIC HEARINGS
HIGHLIGHTED IN GREEN AND PUBLIC
COMMENT.
>> PICNIC.
FOR PUBLIC COMMENT TODAY, WE
HAVE MARTHA BASKIN, FOLLOWED BY
MICHAEL RAMOS, AND THEN MEGAN
CRUZ.
WE SEE DARRELL NOT PRESENT.
DARRELL, IF YOU ARE LISTENING,
PLEASE CALL IN NOW.
WE HAVE LOU BONDS, SUZANNE
GRANT, FOLLOWED BY BARBARA
BERNARD.
SO, WE WILL START WITH MARTHA
BASKIN.
GOOD MORNING, MARTHA.
>> GOOD MORNING.
GOOD MORNING MR. STRAUSS AND
EVERYONE HERE AT GOOD MORNING
TO YOU.
WE'RE GETTING A REPRIEVE AREN'T
WE THIS MORNING?
COOL AIR.
YES.
ALL RIGHT, SO I BEGIN, YES?
>> YES.
>> OKAY.
SO THE CLIMATE CRISIS IS HERE,
AND THE CITY IS DOING NO FAVORS
BY IGNORING THE POLLEN TREES TO
MITIGATE THE CRISIS.
AS TREES GROW, THEY LESSEN THE
IMPACT BY REMOVING CARBON FROM
THE AIR, STORING IT IN THE
TREES AND SOIL AND RELEASING
OXYGEN INTO THE ATMOSPHERE.
UNFORTUNATELY, THE CITY'S
CURRENT TREE REGULATION 2009
DOOLITTLE TO INCENTIVIZE
PROTECTION DURING DEVELOPMENT
WHILE CODE VIOLATIONS ARE
DIFFICULT TO ENFORCE.
BIG TREES ARE OFTEN WAS MOVED
TO FACILITATE DEVELOPMENT EVEN
ONE DESIGN CAN BE RETAIN. ONLY
TWO ARBORISTS SINCE THE
BENEFITS OF TREES EXTEND BEYOND
THE PARCELS WHERE THEY STAND,
THIS IS UNACCEPTABLE.
TREE LOST ITEMS PUBLIC HEALTH
AND CLIMATE RESILIENCY.
DEVELOPERS SHOULD BE EXPECTED
TO RESPECT THESE COMMUNITY
ASSETS, CITY LEADERS SHOULD BE
WILLING TO CHALLENGE THEM IF
THEY REFUSE . THE CURRENT TREE
CODE, HOWEVER , DOES LITTLE TO
PROTECT TREES.
THE CITY KNOWS ITS TREE
PROTECTION ORDINANCE IS
INEFFECTIVE.
CITY COUNCIL AND SEVERAL MAYORS
HAVE REPEATEDLY STATED THE NEED
TO UPDATE THE REGULATIONS. 12
YEARS LATER, VERY LITTLE HAS
BEEN IMPROVED.
I ASK WHAT ARE YOU DOING TO
PROTECT THE MIGHTY OAK, WHOSE
SHADE PROVIDES RELIEF AGAINST
URBAN HEAT, CHERRY TREES TAKE
OUR BLOSSOMS BREATH AWAY.
I'VE SPOKEN WITH ADVOCATES.
THEY WANT TO SEE A MORATORIUM
ON LARGE TREE REMOVAL.
THEY WANT TO KNOW HOW MANY
TREES HAVE BEEN INVENTORIED, AND
HOW SEATTLE INTENDS TO ACHIEVE
ITS 30% TREE CANOPY GOAL IN
JUST 16 YEARS FROM NOW.
MOREOVER, AS BCI IS WANTING TO
KNOW HOW BIPOC AND INDUSTRIAL
AND RURAL COMMUNITIES ARE GOING
TO DOUBLE OR TRIPLE THEIR TREE
CANOPY WHEN THEY CURRENTLY ONLY
HAVE 10 % TO 15%.
THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU, MARTHA.
I'M NOTICING A NUMBER OF
PEOPLE ARE SIGNED UP TODAY FOR
ITEMS NOT ON TODAY'S AGENDA
ERIE TYPICALLY, I WOULD ASK YOU
RESERVE YOUR COMMENTS UNTIL THE
DAY THAT THE ITEM IS ON OUR
AGENDA.
I WILL ALLOW IT TODAY.
THIS IS AN EXCEPTION TO MY
STANDARD RULE.
I'M ALSO SEEING MICHAEL RAMOS
SHOULD BE HIGHLIGHTED IN GREEN,
AS WELL AS DARRELL GROCKHOUSE.
MEGAN, GOOD MORNING.
I SEE YOU THERE.
>> GOOD MORNING.
I AM HERE.
>> GREAT.
>> I AM HERE TO TALK TODAY ABOUT
POWER PERMITTING, WHICH WILL
COME UP LATER IN THIS MEETING,
AND SOME BUILDING REQUIREMENTS
THAT WERE SUPPOSED TO BE IN
EFFECT A YEAR AND A HALF AGO
BUT ARE STILL NOT.
IN 2018, THE CITY REALIZED
STREETS AND AT LEAST WERE BEING
OVERRUN BY THE DOUBLE-DIGIT
INCREASE IN DELIVERY TRUCKS
FROM e-COMMERCE.
THEY DECIDED NEW BUILDINGS
WOULD NEED TO CREATE SPACE
WITHIN THEM TO HELP BEAR THIS
BURDEN.
AFTER THREE YEARS OF RESEARCH
AND VETTING, DIRECTORS RULED 12-
2020 WAS SENT OUT FOR COMMENTS,
AND SDCI TOLD THE COMMUNITY
WOULD BE IN PLACE BY JANUARY
2020.
THE RULE REQUIRED SEVERAL
REQUIREMENTS THAT SEEMS LIKE
COMMON SENSE.
YOU CANNOT JUST DROP OFF A PLAN
AND SAY IT'S GOING TO WORK. YOU
HAVE TO HAVE TURN RADIUS
DIAGRAMS, AND TRUCKS COULD NOT
STICK OUT IN THE ALLEY, AND
IMPORTANTLY, NEW RESIDENTIAL
POWERS, SOME OF WHICH WE ARE
SEEING OVER 1000 PEOPLE, WOULD
NEED A LOADING BIRTH.
THESE RULES WERE VETTED BY
DEVELOPERS, THE DOWNTOWN
SEATTLE ASSOCIATION AND GROUPS
OF COMMERCIAL AND RESIDENTIAL
TAKE OPENERS, BUT IN 2018, THE
RULE WAS DROPPED WITHOUT ANY
EXPLANATION, AND THAT WAS FAR
BEFORE COVID HIT.
WHAT HAS ONCE BEEN A PRIORITY
HAS DROPPED OFF ANYONE'S RADAR.
IT IS NOT AN ACADEMIC OR
TECHNICAL MATTER.
IT REALLY AFFECTS PEOPLE'S
LIVES . I LIVE ON A TRANSIT
ONLY BLOCK, THIRD AVENUE IN A
BUILDING SURROUNDED BY OTHER
BUILDINGS WITHOUT INTERNAL
ROUTING.
THE ONLY WAY WE CAN MAINTAIN
OUR HOMES AND BUSINESSES IS FOR
FUNCTIONAL STREETS AND AT LEAST
SYSTEMS.
TODAY, I'M ASKING TO FIND OUT
WHY AREN'T WE REQUIRING NEW
TOWERS TO DO BASIC THINGS TO
KEEP THE RIGHT-OF-WAY OPENS TWO
AREAS.
LET'S GET SEATTLE DOWNTOWN
SUSTAINABLE AND RESILIENT FOR
THE FUTURE.
THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU, MEGAN.
ALWAYS GREAT TO HEAR YOU.
UP NEXT, WE HAVE LOU BONDS,
FOLLOWED BY SUZANNE GRANT, AND
LAST, BARBARA BERNARD.
LOU?
>> THANK YOU, CHAIR STRAUSS AND
THE REST OF THE COMMITTEE HERE.
I'M SPEAKING SPECIFICALLY ON
NUMBER THREE, SDCI.
I WANT TO BRING TO LIGHT THAT
WE REALLY DO NEED FULL IMPACT
STUDIES ON THESE AT LEAST.
I FOLLOWED THE PROCESS FOR THE
CHROMA BUILDING AND SECOND
AVENUE BETWEEN PINE AND PIKE,
AND EVERYTHING IS NOW GOING TO
BE FOCUSED THROUGH THE ALLEY,
AND AS MEGAN SAID EARLIER, OUR
THIRD AVENUE PROPERTIES ARE BUS
ONLY ON THIRD AVENUE, OUR ALLEY
IS OUR ONLY SOURCE FOR DELIVERY
, UNLOADING AND LOADING FOR OUR
COMMERCIAL AND OFFICE TENANTS.
I WENT THROUGH THE WHOLE
PROCESS OF FOLLOWING ALONG THAT
DEVELOPMENT.
I'M NOT AGAINST DEVELOPMENT AT
ALL, BUT I THINK THERE NEEDS TO
BE A COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
NEIGHBORHOOD BY NEIGHBORHOOD ON
THE FULL IMPACT THAT'S GOING TO
HAPPEN.
THIS ALLEY WAS ALREADY
CONSIDERED AND NONFUNCTIONIG,
NONVIABLE ALLEY BECAUSE OF ITS
RESTRICTIONS ON ONLY HAVING A
16 FOOT WIDTH.
THAT IS NOT GOING TO CHANGE, OR
THE ABILITY TO HAVE TWO-WAY
TRAFFIC IS NEVER GOING TO
HAPPEN, AND TO FORCE ALL THEIR
PARKING AND ALL THEIR DELIVERY,
ET CETERA, TO BE ON THE ALLEY
ONLY IS REALLY GOING TO PUT A
BURDEN ON ALL THE NEIGHBORS AND
CREATE A LONG-TERM NEGATIVE
EFFECT BETWEEN NEIGHBORS, WHICH
IS NOT WHAT WE WANT, SO I JUST
ASK THAT DIRECTOR AND YOUR CREW
REALLY, FULLY VET OUT THESE AT
LEAST, AND WHAT IS THE BEST FOR
EVERYONE INVOLVED, SO THAT WE
HAVE A PROGRESSIVE APPROACH TO
THE DEVELOPMENT.
THANK YOU SO MUCH.
>> THANK YOU, LOU.
GREAT TO HEAR YOU THIS MORNING.
NEXT, WE HAVE SUZANNE GRANT.
I WONDER IF WE WILL GET A
WONDERFUL SONG AGAIN THIS
MORNING.
>> I THOUGHT ABOUT IT.
HONESTLY, THE COUNCIL BILL
120081 , SHALL I CONTINUE?
>> YES, PLEASE.
GOOD MORNING.
>> I DO NOT UNDERSTAND YOUR
INTRO.
COUNCIL SECTION 23.49.037
ALLOWS MORE USE OF THE AREA
FOR HOUSING. IT IS POSSIBLE --
>> SUZANNE, DO YOU WANT TO
SPEAK AT THE PUBLIC HEARING TO
THIS BILL?
IT IS UP NEXT.
>> IS THAT -- OKAY, IS THAT
WHERE I WAS SPEAKING?
I THOUGHT THAT'S MAYBE WHAT YOU
SAID.
>> I DID NOT REALIZE THAT.
MY MISTAKE.
SUN, IF YOU COULD LIST SUZANNE
AS GREEN, AND WE WILL COME BACK
TO YOU IN A MINUTE.
>> THANK YOU.
>> LAST ON THE PUBLIC COMMENT
LIST FOR TODAY IS BARBARA
BERNARD, AND THAT WE WILL
TRANSFER TO THE PUBLIC HEARING
ON COUNCIL BILL 120081.
BARBARA, GOOD MORNING.
>> GOOD MORNING.
THANK YOU FOR HAVING ME HERE
AND I'M BARBARA BERNARD, AND I
WANTED TO COMMENT TODAY ON
SDCI'S AGENDA ITEM REGARDING
PERMITTING REPORT , AND I
WANTED TO DOVETAIL WHAT EVER
THEY SHARED TODAY WITH THEIR
PERMITTING REPORT, HOW
PERMITTING, REMOVING THE TREES
IS STARTING TO BECOME AN
EXTREME ISSUE, AND I WOULD LIKE
TO HAVE THE LAND-USE COMMITTEE
AND THE CITY COUNCIL TO SUPPORT
AND AN ACTIVE MORATORIUM ON
LARGE TREE REMOVAL, ANYTHING 24
INCHES OR LARGER, AND HAVE A
TRUE ORDINANCE PASSED.
I LISTENED AGAIN AS I ALWAYS DO
IN THESE MEETINGS TO YOUR LAND-
USE ACKNOWLEDGMENT AT THE
BEGINNING.
MY HEART ALWAYS SLOWS WHEN I
HEAR IT, BUT I FEEL LIKE IT IS
SO DISINGENUOUS, AND IT'S JUST
NOT FAIR FOR US ANY LONGER TO
SAY WE'RE GOING TO RESPECT THE
TIME WE ARE HERE AND THE
CHOICES WE MAKE, WHEN IT IS
CLEAR THAT WHAT WE'RE DOING TO
OUR LARGE TREES IS NOT
FOLLOWING THAT BELIEF.
EVERY WEEK, I'M MADE AWARE OF
MORE EXCEPTIONAL TREES BEING
CUT DOWN.
I GUESS I AM THE NEIGHBORHOOD
TREE PERSON NOW BECAUSE PEOPLE
FROM ALL THE NEIGHBORHOODS ARE
SENDING ME EMAILS, FINDING ON
INSTAGRAM, AND TELLING ME ABOUT
DIFFERENT TREES COMING DOWN IN
THEIR NEIGHBORHOOD, AND HOW
MANY OF THE BIRDS ARE BEING
IMPACTED TILL NEXT NESTING
SEASON.
I'M GOING THROUGH EXTREME GRIEF
RIGHT NOW BECAUSE THERE'S
NOTHING I CAN DO.
I JUST FEEL WE'RE AT A POINT.
WE KNOW IT'S UNDISPUTED THAT
THERE'S A CLIMATE CRISIS, AND
THE LARGE TREES MAY ACTUALLY BE
THE ONLY THING LEFT TO HELP US.
WHAT IS THE CITY GOING AGAINST
ITS OWN CLIMATE PLANT AND ITS
OWN CANOPY GROWTH GOALS AND
ALLOWING THE REMOVAL TO
CONTINUE TO HAPPEN.
THANK YOU FOR LETTING ME SPEAK.
I APPRECIATE IT.
>> THANK YOU, BARBARA. THANK
YOU FOR SPEAKING WITH US THIS
MORNING.
SUN, CAN YOU CONFIRM THERE ARE
NO PUBLIC REGISTRANTS FOR
PUBLIC COMMENT?
>> CONFIRM THERE ARE NO MORE
PUBLIC COMMENTS FOR
REGISTRANTS.
>> I WILL GET THAT LANGUAGE
CORRECT ONE DAY.
SEE AS WE HAVE NO ADDITIONAL
SPEAKERS PRESENT, WE WILL MOVE
ONTO THE NEXT AGENDA ITEM.
>>> FIRST ITEM OF BUSINESS
TODAY IS A PUBLIC HEARING AND
VOTE ON COUNCIL BILL 120081 .
WILL YOU READ THE ABBREVIATE
TITLE INTO THE RECORD?
>> ITEM NUMB ONE, IN ORDER TO
RELATING TO AFFORDABLE HOUSING
ON PROPERTIES AND OLD
CONTROLLED BY RELIGIOUS
ORGANIZATIONS, MODIFYING
EXISTING DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
TO FACILITATE CHRISTIAN NATION
OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING.
>> I VERY EXCITED TO HAVE THIS
LEGISLATION BEFORE US TODAY.
IT WILL UNLOCK MORE
POSSIBILITIES FOR AFFORDABLE
HOUSING ACROSS SEATTLE ALLOW
FOR IMPORTANT AFFORDABLE
HOUSING PROJECTS TO CONTINUE.
WE WILL BRIEF ON THIS. I PLAN
TO ASK TO SUSPEND THE RULE SO
WE CAN VOTE ON THIS LEGISLATION
TODAY.
I DO HAVE A STANDARD WHERE I
LIKE TO HAVE BUILT BEFORE US IN
TWO COMMITTEES, AND THAT IS WHY
WE HAD THE PUBLIC HEARING, WHY
WE HAD A BRIEFING ON THIS AT
THE LAST COMMITTEE.
BEFORE WE BEGIN THE PUBLIC
HEARING, WE ARE JOINED BY ALY
PENNUCCI OF COUNCIL STAFF WHO
IS FILLING IN.
ALY, CAN YOU PROVIDE A BRIEF
OVERVIEW OF THE LEGISLATION,
AND THE AMENDMENTS BEFORE US
TODAY, AND PLEASE, AT THIS
TIME, SINCE WE HAVE ALL OF
THESE PUBLIC REGISTRANTS LINED
UP, I WANT TO BE RESPECTFUL OF
THEIR TIME, SO MAYBE A HIGH-
LEVEL OVERVIEW, AND WE WILL GET
INTO THE DETAILS AFTER THE
PUBLIC HEARING.
>> THANK YOU.
COUNCILMEMBER STRAUSS, I'M
HAPPY TO PROVIDE A BRIEF
SUMMARY, AND FOR TODAY'S
DISCUSSION, I WAS NOT PLANNING
TO GO INTO GREAT DETAIL ON THE
BILL IN GENERAL, BUT I'M HAPPY
TO ANSWER QUESTIONS ONCE WE
MOVE AFTER THE PUBLIC HEARING
AND MOVE INTO DISCUSSION OF
AMENDMENTS.
SO, PENNUCCI THEY WOULD
IMPLEMENT SUBSTITUTE HOUSE BILL
1377 ENACTED IN WASHINGTON
STATE IN 2019 AND NOW CODIFIED
IN OUR CW 36.78 DIED 545. THAT
STATUTE REQUIRES THAT LOCAL
JURISDICTIONS MUST ALLOW AN
INCREASE BONUS WITH LOCAL NEED
FOR ANY AFFORDABLE HOUSING
DEVELOPMENT OF ANY SINGLE-
FAMILY OR MULTIFAMILY RESIDENCE
LOCATED ON PROPERTY OWNED OR
CONTROLLED BY A RELIGIOUS
ORGANIZATION.
AS PROPOSED, COUNCIL BILL
120081 WOULD ESTABLISH
ELIGIBILITY REQUIREMENTS IN THE
LAND-USE CODE AND BONUS
PROVISION FOR PROPERTIES OWNED
OR CONTROLLED BY RELIGIOUS
ORGANIZATIONS THAT ARE
REDEVELOPED WITH AFFORDABLE
HOUSING.
AS INTRODUCED, THE
AFFORDABILITY LEVELS WOULD BE
THE MINIMUM ESTABLISHED BY
STATUTE.
ALL WRESTLE UNION AFFORDABLE TO
HOUSEHOLDS AT OR BELOW 80% OF
MEDIAN INCOME FOR AT LEAST 50
YEARS, AND TO PROPOSE BONUS
PROVISIONS VARY BY ZONE.
THIS PROPOSED LEGISLATION WOULD
PROPEL THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE
STATE'S STATUTE.
THERE ARE FOUR AMENDMENTS
PROPOSED BY COUNCILMEMBER
PEDERSEN WHICH I WILL WALK
THROUGH . THAT IS ALL I HAVE.
>> THANK YOU, ALY.
CAN YOU GIVE US JUST A TOPLINE
SUMMARY OF THIS FOR ME,
PLEASE?
>> HAPPY TOO.
SO, THE FIRST AMENDMENT WOULD
LOOK AT THE AFFORDABILITY
REQUIREMENTS, LOOKING AT IT
AVERAGING OF 60% OF AMI
REPRESENTING 80% OF AMI.
THE SECOND AMENDMENT WOULD
INCREASE THE MINIMUM TERM OF
AFFORDABILITY TO 75 YEARS FROM
50 YEARS HERE THAT IS WHEN THE
BILL WAS INTRODUCED.
THE THIRD AMENDMENT WOULD
DEMAND CONTROLLED BUY FOR
ESTABLISHING QUALIFYING AS A
SECOND PARTICIPATE IN THE BONUS
PROGRAM, AND THE FOURTH
AMENDMENT THAT WAS NOT UP
POSTED TO THE ATTENDANT WHAT
DISTRIBUTED THIS MORNING WILL
BE ADDED TO THE RECORD AFTER
THE FACT WOULD REQUESTTHE
ANNUAL REPORT ON THE
IMPLEMENTATION OF THIS
LEGISLATION.
>> THANK YOU, ALY.
VERY HELPFUL.
BEFORE WE BEGIN THE REMOTE
PUBLIC HEARING, I WOULD AGAIN
ASK THAT EVERYONE PLEASE BE
PATIENT AS WE CONTINUE TO LEARN
TO OPERATE THIS NEW SYSTEM IN
REAL TIME AND NAVIGATE TO THE
INEVITABLE GROWING PAINS . WE
ARE CONTINUOUSLY LOOKING FOR
WAYS TO FINE-TUNE THIS PROCESS
AND ADDING NEW FEATURES THAT
ALLOW FOR ADDITIONAL MEANS OF
PUBLIC PARTICIPATION IN OUR
PUBLIC HEARINGS.
EACH SPEAKER WILL BE GIVEN TWO
MINUTES TO SPEAK.
I WILL CALL ON ONE SPEAKER AT A
TIME AT THE ORDER IN WHICH THEY
WERE JUST ON THE COUNCIL'
WEBSITE.
IF YOU HAVE NOT REGISTERED TO
SPEAK AND WOULD LIKE TO, YOU
CAN SIGN UP BEFORE THE END OF
THE PUBLIC HEARING BY GOING TO
THE COUNCIL WEBSITE,
SEATTLE.GOV/COUNSEL.
THIS PHONE NUMBER IS DIFFERENT
THAN THE SOUTH COUNCIL LINE.
MAKE SURE THAT YOU ARE CALLED
IN.
I AM SEEING REVEREND ROBERT
JEFFREY NOT PRESIDENT.
I AM SEEING REVEREND CURTIS
TAYLOR NOT PRESENT, AND DALE
GROTH HOUSE, NOT PRESIDENT.
IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ,
PLEASE CALL IN NOW.
THANK YOU, SORRY.
I WAS LOOKING AT THE LIST.
PLEASE BEGIN ONCE I CALL ON
YOUR NAME.
STAFF WILL UNMUTE THE
APPROPRIATE PHONE, AND THAT
WILL BE YOUR CUE TO SPEAK HERE
PLEASE THEN PRESS START SIX,
NOT POUND SIX.
STAR SIX.
BEGIN SPEAKING BY STATING YOUR
NAME AND THE ITEM IN WHICH YOU
ARE ADDRESSING.
PUBLIC, SHOULD RELATE TO
COUNCIL BILL 120081.
IF YOU HAVE COMMENTS ABOUT
SOMETHING THAT IS NOT THIS
BILL ARE ON TODAY'S AGENDA, YOU
CAN PROVIDE WRITTEN COMMENTS BY
EMAILING THE OFFICE.
SPEAKERS WILL HEAR A CHIME IN
10 SECONDS ARE LEFT IN THE
ALLOTTED TIME.
ONCE YOU HEAR A TIME, WE ASK
YOU BEGIN TO WRAP UP YOUR
PUBLIC COMMENT, AND IF SPEAKERS
DO NOT END THERE COMMENT AT THE
ALLOTTED TIME, SPEAKERS WILL BE
NEEDED TO ALLOW US TO'S CALL ON
THE NEXT SPEAKER . ONCE YOU
COMPLETE PUBLIC COMMENT, PLEASE
DISCONNECT FROM THIS LINE, AND
IF YOU LIKE TO CONTINUE
FOLLOWING THE MEETING, PLEASE
DO SO BY SEATTLE CHANNEL AND BY
THE LISTING ITEMS LISTED ON THE
AGENDA . THE PUBLIC HEARING ON
COUNCIL BILL 120081 IS NOW
OPEN, WE WILL BEGIN WITH THE
FIRST PERSON ON THE LIST.
WE HAVE ROBERT JEFFREY LISTED
AS NOT PRESENT, FOLLOWED BY
ASIA, DALE, NAOMI SEE,
COUNCILMEMBER RICHARD TOMLIN,
AND CURTIS TAYLOR.
WE WILL BEGIN WITH ASIA CORBRAY,
THEN MICHAEL AND SUZANNE.
REVEREND ROBERT JEFFREY AND
DALE GROUTHOUSE, IF YOU ARE
LISTENING, PLEASE CALL IN NOW.
WE SEE YOU AS NOT LISTED , AS
WELL AS REVEREND TAYLOR.
GOOD MORNING, ASIA.
FEEL FREE TO TAKE IT AWAY AT
YOUR CONVENIENCE.
>> THANK YOU.
HI, EVERYONE.
MY NAME IS CORBRAY, ASIA WITH
THE HOUSING INSTITUTE, AND I AM
SITTING ON HOUND SO BILL CB
120081.
I HAVE CALLED ON BEHALF OF
AFFORDABLE HOUSING ON RELIGIOUS
PROPERTY.
WE HEARD THERE WAS SOME CONCERN
TO BE RELEASED THAT 80% AMI.
I AM EXTENDING MY SUPPORT FOR
THE AMENDMENT FOR LOWING THE
INCOME TARGET IN ALLOWING SOME
UNITS AT 80% AMI AS LEAST AS
THE OUTREACHES AT THE 60% OR
BELOW.
AND THIS IS ALIGNED WITH TAX
CREDIT RULE THAT ALLOWS FOR
INCOME AVERAGING . THIS
LEGISLATION IS INCREDIBLY
IMPORTANT VALUABLE MAN ON
RELIGIOUS INSTITUTIONS, WHICH
HAVE SERVED COMMUNITIES AND
COMMUNITIES OF COLOR THROUGHOUT
THE SERIES.
THIS LEGISLATION INCREASES
CAPACITY FOR PROVIDING BADLY
NEEDED AFFORDABLE HOUSING.
BY PROVIDING AN INCREASE IN
ALLOWABLE HEIGHT AND AREA
RATIO, OUR RELIGIOUS PARTNERS
WITH BE ABLE TO PROVIDE RESPONSE
TO SAFE, AFFORDABLE HOUSING FOR
NEIGHBORS IN NEED, ESPECIALLY
THOSE DISPLACED BY GENTRIFIED
NEIGHBORHOODS.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
>> THANK YOU.
UP NEXT, WE HAVE MICHAEL RAMOS,
FOLLOWED BY DALE GROUTHOUSE,
STILL NOT PRESENT, AND NAOMI
SEE.
GOOD MORNING.
>> GOOD MORNING.
MY NAME IS MICHAEL RAMOS, AND I
SERVE AS DIRECTOR OF THE CHURCH
COUNCIL OF GREATER SEATTLE .
THE CHURCH COUNCIL IS ENGAGING
CONGREGATIONS AND PEOPLE OF
FAITH IN SEATTLE TOWARD THE
COMMON GOOD AND A MORE JUST
SOCIETY SINCE 1919.
OVER THE LAST 40 YEARS, OUR
CHURCH HAS SERVED THE CITY BY
PROVIDING AN ARRAY OF SOCIAL
SERVICES AND MINISTRIES AT THE
INTERCEPTION OF HOMELESSNESS
AND AFFORDABLE HOUSING AS PART
OF OUR MISSION TO LOVE OUR
NEIGHBORS AS OURSELVES.
CURRENTLY, I SERVE ON THE
AFFORDABLE HOUSING COMMITTEE.
WE HAVE LONG ASKED THE CITY TO
DO MORE TO PROVIDE REGRESS FOR
THE GENTRIFICATION AND
DISPLACEMENT THAT HAVE IMPACTED
COMMUNITIES OF COLOR.
I THANK YOU FOR CONSIDERING
THIS LEGISLATION IN RESPONSE OF
HB 1377, FOR WHICH WE ADVOCATE
AT THE STATE LEGISLATURE.
A PATH TO ALLOW THAT HELPS
HOUSE THE HOUSE AND CREATE
HOMES THAT ALL RESIDENTS CAN
THRIVE.
OUR CHURCHES NEED GREATER
FLEXIBILITY IN ORDER TO EXECUTE
OUR VISION FOR MAXIMUM
CONTRIBUTIONS AS STOCK FOR
AFFORDABLE HOUSING.
IT WILL SEVERELY AFFECT THE
ABILITY OF OUR CONGREGATIONS TO
BE ABLE TO DEVELOP HOUSING
SUCCESSFULLY ON LAND TO BE
OWNED AND OCCUPIED.
CHURCHES NEED PARTNERS FOR THE
PROJECT TO BECOME A REALITY.
THEY WILL NOT BE ABLE TO TAKE
ADVANTAGE OF THE DENSITY BONUS.
AFFORDABILITY FROM 50 TO 75
YEARS IS A FURTHER DISINCENTIVE
FOR WORKABLE PROJECTS. PLEASE
DO NOT ACCEPT THE PROPOSED
AMENDMENTS, AND PLEASE DELAY
VOTING ON THE MEASURE UNTIL
APPROPRIATE LANGUAGE WITH
STAKEHOLDERS CAN BE DETERMINED.
IN THIS WAY, THE ORIGINAL
PURPOSE FACILITATING FAITH
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENTS CAN BE
ENHANCED, RATHER THAN
DIMINISHED.
WENT FAITH COMMITTEES HAVE
ABILITY TO DEVELOP, THE CITY
AND ALL WHO LIVE HERE WIN.
THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU, MICHAEL.
WE SEE THAT DALE GROUTHOUSE IS
NOT PRESENT.
SUZANNE, GOOD MORNING.
THANKS FOR WORKING WITH US TO
GET YOU IN THE RIGHT PLACE.
>> GOOD MORNING.
MY NAME IS SUZANNE GRANT, AND
I'M COMMENTING ON COUNCIL BILL
120081, WHICH IS A GOOD BILL,
BUT IT ALLOWS MORE USE OF THE
AREA FOR HOUSING.
IT IS POSSIBLE TO INCREASE BOTH
, BUT THERE NEEDS TO BE A
MANDATE FOR A CREATIVE SOLUTION
FROM THE DEVELOPER AND THE
ARCHITECT THAT WILL INCLUDE
RETAINING ANY MATURE AND
EXCEPTIONAL TREES AROUND THE
PROPERTY . CERTAINLY WITH THE
HEATWAVES AND ANGER THAT'S
BEING EXPERIENCED MORE OFTEN IN
THE BILL THAT INCLUDES A GE IN
MORATORIUM ON LARGE TREE
REMOVAL.
THAT IS UNTIL THIS ORDINANCE IS
FINALLY PASSED.
WITHOUT ANY METHOD OF
PROTECTION FOR TREES, IT WOULD
ONLY INCREASE EXEMPTIONS . HOW
ARE THE DISADVANTAGED
COMMUNITIES AND THOSE LIVING IN
MULTIFAMILY HOUSING , WHO
CURRENTLY HAVE 10% TO 15% TREE
CANOPY COVER, DOUBLE OR TRIPLE
THEIR TREE CANOPY COVER TO
ACHIEVE SEATTLE 30% TARGET
CANOPY COVER IN JUST 16 YEARS?
THAT IS THE 2030 PROMISE.
DAN LEWIS, YOU ARE MY
COUNCILMEMBER, AND ALEX
PEDERSEN WORKED THE HARDEST TO
SAVE OUR TREES, AND I HIGHLY
APPRECIATE YOUR RECOGNITION.
USE YOUR POWER TO MAINTAIN THE
MATURE AND EXCEPTIONAL TREES OF
THE NEIGHBORHOOD, WHERE DENSITY
IS PLANS TO INCREASE.
LISTEN TO SUZANNE AND SAVE OUR
TREES.
FREDERICK DESIGNED OUR PARKS
AND HAVE UNCONSCIOUS INFLUENCE
AND HAVE STRIKING WAYS THAT
PEOPLE'S SPIRITUAL SPACE CAN BE
SHAPED BY THEIR ENVIRONMENT.
YOU HAVE THE POWERFUL ABILITY
TO USE SOMEONE'S POWER, AND WE
CERTAINLY CAN USE ALL HELP
THOUGH WE CAN GET AN THIS
EXISTENTIAL CRISIS.
LASTLY, I WOULD LIKE FOR DR.
TORGESON TO PROVIDE THE TOTALS
OF INVENTORY BY SDCI OF THE
NUMBER OF TREES AND TREE GROWTH
THAT HAS BEEN REMOVED OVER THE
YEARS.
PLEASE SHARE THIS DIRECTOR,
AND DO NOT SKIP IT IN YOUR
QUARTERLY REPORT THIS TIME.
THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU, SUZANNE.
UP NEXT, WE HAVE NAOMI SEE,
FOLLOWED BY COUNCILMEMBER
RICHARD TOMLIN, AND WE STILL
HAVE REVEREND ROBERT JEFFREY
NOT PRESENT, DALE 34 NOT PRESENT
. IF YOU ARE LISTENING, PLEASE
DO CALL IN NOW.
NAOMI, GOOD MORNING.
>> GOOD MORNING.
I HOPE EVERYONE IS WELL. I WANT
TO SAY I'M INCREDIBLY EXCITED
TO SPEAK TODAY, AS IT IS A
CULMINATION OF THE INCREDIBLE
ADVOCACY WORK THAT OUR CHURCH
PARTNERS, ESPECIALLY CENTRAL
DISTRICT PASTORS, WHO ARE
COMMITTED TO USING THEIR LAND
IN SUPPORT, THEIR LAND TO
SUPPORT MITIGATING
GENTRIFICATION AND DISPLACEMENT
OF THEIR COMMUNITIES.
GIVEN THAT MANY CHURCHES WERE
SYSTEMICALLY UNDERSOLD IN AREAS
OF HIGH OPPORTUNITIES, THIS
BILL IS CRUCIAL FOR OPPORTUNITY
TO TRULY SERVE THE COMMUNITIES
IN A WAY THAT INCREASES
AFFORDABILITY IN ONE OF OUR
GREATEST CRISES, WHICH IS
HOUSING AND HOMELESSNESS.
MY COLLEAGUE REALLY DID A GREAT
JOB OF THE OVERVIEW AND I WOULD
LIKE TO REITERATE OUR SUPPORT
FOR AMENDMENT ONE, WHICH WOULD
GIVE US FLEXIBILITY TO DO
INCOME AVERAGING OFF OF TAX
CREDIT POLICIES, WHILE AT THE
SAME TIME, ENABLING US TO SERVE
THE LOWEST INCOME INDIVIDUALS
WHO ARE AT GREATEST RISK OF
DISPLACEMENT AND HOUSELESSNESS.
AGAIN, WANT TO ECHO OUR
GRATITUDE FOR FORWARDING THIS
BILL AND REALLY LOOKING FORWARD
TO ALL THE WORK WE CAN DO
TOGETHER TO INCREASE THE
PROVISION OF HOUSING UNDER THIS
. THANKS.
>> THANK YOU, NAOMI.
AND MR. AHN, I UNDERSTAND NAOMI
SPOKE WITH HIM WITHIN THE TIME
LIMITS.
JUST WANTED TO CHECK HOW THAT
HAS BEEN.
WHEN YOU RESET, I WILL CALL ON
COUNCILMEMBER RICHARD PULLMAN.
WE ARE READY TO GO.
THANK YOU, GOOD MORNING,
COUNCILMEMBER TOMLIN.
HE WILL NEED TO PRESS STAR SIX.
>> OH?
>> THERE YOU ARE.
GOOD MORNING.
>> THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR THE
OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK YOUR.
I'M HERE ON BEHALF OF A COMPANY
WHICH IS A PARTNERSHIP CALLED
TOM AND COLUMBIA, WHICH IS
PROMOTING AFFORDABLE HOUSING.
WE'RE WORKING WITH SEVERAL
CHURCHES ON THESE KINDS OF
DEVELOPMENTS, AND IN PARTICULAR
WITH ONE CHURCH NOT HIGHLIGHTED
IN THE REPORT, WHICH IS A GREAT
EXAMPLE OF THE BENEFITS.
THIS CONGREGATION WANTS TO TAKE
IT SAFELY TO ACTION AND TO
MAINTAIN ITS CHURCH.
IT'S GOT MIXED ZONING OF SINGLE-
FAMILY, AND THEY BUILT THE
GROUND FLOOR WITH COMMUNITY
BUSINESSES, CHILDCARE, AND THE
3400 SQUARE FOOT SANCTUARY,
UNITS AT 50% IN THE Mc
BUILDING.
IT'S LOCATED WITH A SECRET
TRANSIT ROUTE IN AN URBAN
VILLAGE . THE INTENT IS TO
RESPECT THE SINGLE-FAMILY
NEIGHBORS BY PUTTING
POTENTIALLY NO MORE THAN
TOWNHOUSES AS A SINGLE FAMILY
OWNED PROPERTY.
A WONDERFUL THING THAT THIS
LEGISLATION WILL DO IS ALLOW
EITHER MAXIMIZING THE CAPACITY
FOR THIS SITE, OR ALLOW US TO
EXPERIMENT WITH DEVELOPMENT IT
IMPROVES THE FINANCIALS,
PROVIDES MORE AFFORDABLE
HOUSING, INCLUDING FAMILY
HOUSING, ALLOWS FLEXIBILITY SO
THAT THE SANCTUARY CAN BE AT A
HEIGHT THAT WILL WORK WELL FOR
THE CHURCH AS A WHOLE, PROVIDES
BENEFITS FOR THOSE WHO NEED
HOUSING FOR THE CHURCH, FOR THE
CITY AS A WHOLE.
IT IS A WIN, WIN, WIN FOR ALL.
WE WANT TO STRONGLY SUPPORT
THIS LEGISLATION. THANK YOU
VERY MUCH FOR THE OPPORTUNITY
TO SPEAK YOUR
>> THANK YOU COUNCILMEMBER.
IT IS GREAT TO HEAR YOU ARE
STILL SERVING OUR COMMUNITY,
AND THANK YOU FOR EVERYTHING
YOU ARE DOING FOR SEATTLE.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
>> NEXT, WE HAVE REVEREND
ROBERT JEFFREY, WHO I SEE IS
NOW PRESENT.
WE STILL HAVE DARRELL
GROUTHOUSE, AND REVEREND
TAYLOR, IF YOU ARE LISTENING,
PLEASE CALL IN . GOOD MORNING,
REVEREND JEFFREY.
HOW ARE YOU?
>> IT'S GREAT TO BE HERE.
MY NAME IS ROBERT JEFFREY.
I'M THE SENIOR PASTOR. I'VE BEEN
THERE OVER 35 YEARS.
DURING THAT TIME, WE RECEIVED
SOME CONSIDERABLE
GENTRIFICATION OF OUR
COMMUNITY.
WE HAVE SEEN ANY OF OUR MEMBERS
HAVING TO MOVE OUT AND MOVE FAR
AWAY AS TAKOMA.
OUR CHURCH HAS BEEN INVOLVED
FOR THE LAST FEW YEARS IN
CREATING HOUSING AND WORKING
WITH LEHIGH, A HOUSING
ORGANIZATION IN THE CITY TO
HELP CREATE HOUSINGFOR PEOPLE
WHO HAVE BEEN GENTRIFIED AND
PEOPLE WHO NOW ARE HOMELESS AS
WELL.
SO, I CALLED IN TO SUPPORT THIS
LEGISLATION BECAUSE I BELIEVE
THAT, IN ORDER TO MAXIMIZE THE
HOUSING THAT IS NEEDED IN OUR
COMMUNITY, WE NEED THIS KIND OF
LEGISLATION TO ADDRESS A REALLY
ACUTE PROBLEM GOING ON IN THE
COMMUNITY NOW.
OUR CHURCH HAS LAND.
WE ARE WORKING WITH LEHIGH TO
CREATE ABOUT 85 UNITS . WITHOUT
THIS LEGISLATION, WE WOULD NOT
BE ABLE TO CREATE THOSE UNITS.
IT IS VERY IMPORTANT FOR US TO
BE ABLE TO DO THAT, NOT JUST TO
BRING IT BACK, BUT BRING IT
BACK TO THE COMMUNITY PEOPLE
WHO HAVE BEEN PUSHED OUT OF THE
COMMUNITY AND WOULD LIKE TO
RETURN.
MY HOPE IS THAT COUNCIL WOULD
LOOK FAVORABLY UPON THIS
LEGISLATION.
>> AND SUN, CAN YOU CAN TURN
WITH ME THAT DARRELL GROUTHOUSE
AND REVEREND TAYLOR NOT
PRESENT?
>> THERE ARE NO MORE OTHER
PUBLIC HEARING REGISTRANTS.
>> GREAT.
>> DARRELL AND REVEREND TAYLOR,
IF YOU ARE LISTENING, PLEASE DO
SEND YOUR COMMENTS INTO MY
OFFICE, SHOULD YOU DESIRE TO
HAVE THEM RECORDED IN THE
OFFICIAL RECORD.
AND AT THIS TIME, I DO NOT HAVE
ANYONE FURTHER OR REMOTELY
PRESENT TO SPEAK. THAT WAS OUR
LAST SPEAKER PRESENT IN PUBLIC
HEARING ON COUNCIL BILL 120081
. IT IS NOW CLOSED.
THANK YOU TO EVERYONE WHO
PROVIDED COMMENTS TODAY. I
WOULD LIKE TO NOW RETURN TO ALY
FOR ANY MORE IN DEPTH
PRESENTATION OF THE UNDERLYING
BILL, AND THEN WE WILL MOVE ON
TO THE AMENDMENT.
>> THANK YOU, CHAIR STRAUSS,
COMMITTEE MEMBERS.
JUST TO QUICKLY SUMMARIZE AT A
LIGHT HIGH LEVEL WHAT THE
LEGISLATION IS, THIS WOULD
ALLOW DEVELOPMENT FOR
PROPERTIES OWNED OR CONTROLLED
BY A RELIGIOUS ORGANIZATION,
PROVIDED ALL THE HOUSING
CREATED IS INCOME RESTRICTED,
WHETHER RENTAL OR OWNERSHIP
HOUSING, AND THAT ALL HOUSING
IS AFFORDABLE TO HOUSEHOLDS
WITH INCOMES AT OR BELOW 80% OF
AREA MEDIAN INCOME WITH AN
AFFORDABILITY TERM OF AT LEAST
50 YEARS INCLUDING IF THE
PROPERTY IS SOLD . AND SO AS I
MENTIONED IN THE OPENING
REMARKS, THE PROPOSED
LEGISLATION PROVIDES ADDITIONAL
THE BETTERMENT CAPACITY FOR
DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS THAT MEET
THOSE REQUIREMENTS, AND THE
ADDITIONAL CAPACITY VARIES BY
ZONE.
I WILL NOT REVIEW THE DETAILS
OF ALL THE CHANGES, BUT AS AN
EXAMPLE, IN SINGLE-FAMILY ZONES
, AN ADDITIONAL 0.5 FLOOR AREA
RATIO AND DEVELOPMENT CAPACITY,
AND A 15% INCREASE AND COVERAGE
WOULD BE ALLOWED. AND
COMMERCIAL ZONES, HEIGHTS OF UP
TO 80 FEET, 2 ADDITIONAL FORCE
COULD BE ACHIEVED, AN
ADDITIONAL 0.25 TO 1.5 AREA
COULD BE UTILIZED, AND THERE
WOULD BE SOME EXEMPTIONS FOR
DEVELOPMENT IN URBAN CENTERS
AND VILLAGES AND WITHIN A
QUARTER-MILE OF TRANSIT
SERVICE.
THAT PROVIDES A COUPLE OF
EXAMPLES OF HOW THE ADDITIONAL
DEVELOPMENT CAPACITY VARIES BY
ZONE. UNLESS THERE ARE
QUESTIONS ON THE UNDERLYING BILL
, I WOULD BE READY TO WALK
THROUGH THE AMENDMENTS FOR THE
COMMITTEE.
>> GREAT.
I WANT TO CHECK WITH MR. AHN.
I'M SEEING I NEED TO SUSPEND
THE RULES.
DO WE NEED TO DO THAT NOW OR
AFTER WE HEAR THE BRIEFING ON
THE MINUTES?
>> YOU NEED TO SUSPEND THEM.
>> WHY DON'T WE DO THAT NOW?
UNLESS THERE ARE QUESTIONS FOR
MY COLLEAGUES, I WOULD ASK THAT
THEY SUSPEND THE RULES TO ALLOW
US TO PROCEED WITH THE VOTING
ON THE AMENDMENTS IN THE
THE RULES TO ALLOW US TO VOTE D
ON THE SAME DAY AS THE PUBLIC
HEARING.
IS THERE A SECOND?
>> SECOND.
>> THANK YOU IT HAS BEEN MOVED
AND SUSPENDED TO SUSPEND THE
RULES ON VOTE ON THE SAME DAY
AS PUBLIC HEARING . WILL THE
CLICK PLEASE CALL, AND CLERKS,
IS THIS PART OF WHEN WE VOTE.
DO WE NEED TO VOTE ON
SUSPENDING THE RULES?
>> WE DO.
>> WILL THE CLICK PLEASE CALL
THE ROLL ON SUSPENDING THE
RULES TO ALLOW VOTE ON THE SAME
DAY OF PUBLIC HEARING?
>> COUNCILMEMBER PEDERSEN?
>> ABSTAIN.
>> COUNCILMEMBER LEWIS?
>> YES.
>> MOSQUEDA.
>> YES.
>> CHAIR STRAUSS.
>> YES.
MOTION CARRIES.
WE MOVE ON TO DISCUSSING THE
FOUR AMENDMENTS FROM
COUNCILMEMBER PEDERSEN, THREE
INCLUDED IN THE AGENDA, AND ONE
THAT WAS WALK ON.
COUNCILMEMBER PEDERSEN, WOULD
YOU LIKE TO BEGIN, OR WOULD YOU
LIKE ALY TO START?
>> THANK YOU, CHAIR.
I THINK ALY , THE NEW CHIEF
FROM OUR CITY COUNCIL STAFF HAS
DONE A GREAT JOB SUMMARIZING
THEY AMENDMENT BY AM I. I ALSO
WANT TO THANK FREEMAN FOR
WORKING WITH US ON THE COUNCIL
BILL, AS WE KNEW TRANSIT AND IS
IMPLEMENTED A NEW STATE LAW,
WHICH ALLOWS RELIGIOUS
INSTITUTIONS TO INCREASE
DENSITY ON LAND THEY OWN OR
CONTROL IF THEY PROVIDE
AFFORDABLE HOUSING FOR SEVERAL
DECADES.
THE THREE AMENDMENTS POSTED
ALREADY ONLINE IN MY VIEW
REFINE THE BILL, WE MAKE SURE
TO SERVE OUR LOW INCOME
NEIGHBORS.
WHILE AMENDMENT ONE STILL
ENABLE SOME UNITS TO SERVE
RESIDENTS EARNING AS MUCH AS 80%
AMI, THE OVERALL AVERAGE MUST
SERVE THOSE AT 60% OF AREA
MEDIAN INCOME.
BRINGING THAT AVERAGE DOWN TO
SERVE LOWER INCOME
NEIGHBORHOODS.
AMENDMENT TWO WOULD INCREASE
THE NUMBER OF YEARS THE PROJECT
MUST REMAIN AFFORDABLE FROM 50
YEARS TO 75 YEARS, WHICH
MATCHES A KEY PROVISION OF THE
MANDATORY AFFORDABLE HOUSING.
AMENDMENT THREE WOULD CLOSE,
WHAT I VIEW, IS A LOOPHOLE ON
THE DEFINITION OF THE WORD
"CONTROLLED," SO THAT THE
RELIGIOUS ORGANIZATIONS
MAINTAIN MEANINGFUL CONTROL OF
THEIR PROPERTIES, AND THE
FOURTH AND FINAL AMENDMENT WHICH
I CIRCULATED TO ANY MEMBERS
THIS MORNING SIMPLY ASKED THE
EXECUTIVE FOR THE ANNUAL
REPORTING ON THE IMPLEMENTATION
, SUCH AS THE AFFORDABILITY
RESTRICTIONS USED, PUBLIC
SUBSIDY USED IF ANY, AND THE
ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURES.
I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER QUESTIONS
ABOUT THE ORDINANCE.
THANK YOU, CHAIR.
>> THANK YOU, COUNCILMEMBER
PEDERSEN.
ALY, WOULD YOU LIKE TO WALK US
THROUGH EACH AMENDMENT?
>> HAPPY TO, CHAIR STRAUSS.
THANK YOU, COUNCILMEMBER
PEDERSEN.
I WON'T GO INTO GREAT DETAIL
BECAUSE COUNCILMEMBER PEDERSEN
COVERED MUCH OF WHAT I WAS
GOING TO SAY, BUT I WILL
PERHAPS WALK ONE BY ONE FOR
PURPOSES OF THE DISCUSSION AND
IF THERE ARE ANY QUESTIONS FROM
YOU OR YOUR COLLEAGUES ON THAT.
AMENDMENT ONE AS COUNCILMEMBER
PEDERSEN DESCRIBED WOULD LOWER
THE AVERAGE AFFORDABLE HOUSING
INCOME ELIGIBILITY THRESHOLD TO
60% OF AMI FOR RENTER
HOUSEHOLDS IT WOULD RETAIN THE
80% AREA MEDIAN INCOME OR AMI
REQUIREMENT FOR HOME OWNERSHIP
UNITS. AS AN EXAMPLE WHAT THIS
MIGHT LOOK LIKE IF YOU HAD 100
UNIT BUILDING BUILT UNDER THIS
NEW REQUIREMENT, YOU COULD MEET
OR DO BETTER THAN THE AVERAGE
60% REQUIRED IF THERE WAS A MIX
OF 30, 60, OF UNITS THAT WILL
BE AFFORDABLE TO HOUSEHOLDS AT
30%, 60%, AND 80% OF AMI.
30 AT 30% AMI FOR 60% AMI, 30
OF THE UNITS AT 80% OF AMI.
THAT IS ONE EXAMPLE OF THE TYPE
OF MIX OF UNITS THAT COULD BE
INCLUDED IN THEIR PROPERTY AND
MEET THIS NEW REQUIREMENT WITH
THE AVERAGING.
I WILL LEAVE IT AT THAT.
>> THANK YOU, ALY.
THAT IS VERY HELPFUL.
I GUESS I WILL RELAY MY THOUGHTS
ON THESE AMENDMENTS AND IF
ANYONE ELSE HAS QUESTIONS,
PLEASE BE READY.
I WANT TO THANK COUNCILMEMBER
PEDERSEN 40s AMENDMENTS.
I THINK THEY HAVE GOOD
INTENTION.
HOWEVER, I WILL NOT BE
SUPPORTING THE THREE AMENDMENTS
TODAY.
I HAVE HEARD, YOU HAVE HEARD IN
PUBLIC COMMENT FROM BILL RAMOS,
THE CHAIR OF -- THE CHURCH
COUNCIL OF GREATER SEATTLE WITH
CONCERNS ABOUT THESE
AMENDMENTS.
I THINK THAT FURTHER
STAKEHOLDER RING IS NEEDED AND
NECESSARY FOR EACH OF THESE,
AND IN PARTICULAR, I WANT TO
THANK COUNCILMEMBER PEDERSEN
FOR BRINGING THE FOURTH
AMENDMENT TODAY, WHICH WILL
GIVE US REPORTING DATA FOR A
YEAR FROM NOW ON HOW WE MIGHT
REFINE THIS POLICY. ONE OF THE
REASONS I WON'T BE SUPPORTING
THE AMENDMENTS TODAY IS BECAUSE
I THINK FURTHER STAKEHOLDER IS
IT NECESSARY, AND MANY HAVE
BEEN RELYING ON THE BILLS
PASSED BY THE LEGISLATURE, AS A
FIELD GOAL, AS AN UNDERSTANDING
OF THE FRAMEWORK AND HOW THIS
LEGISLATION WILL BE PASSED HERE
AT CITY COUNCIL.
FOR AMENDMENT ONE, WHEN MOST
PROPERTIES THAT UTILIZES
LEGISLATION WILL BE PROCEEDING
AS SUBSIDY FROM OPPOSITE
HOUSING THAT REQUIRES THE
AFFORDABILITY, 60% OR AREA
MEDIAN INCOME OR BELOW, IF THE
CHURCH IS ABLE TO PROVIDE
AFFORDABLE WORKHOUSE HOUSING
WITHOUT CITY FUNDS, THIS IS THE
FLEXIBILITY THAT IS NEEDED IN
THE CURRENT LEGISLATION THAT
DOES NOT INCLUDE THE AMENDMENT.
I BELIEVE WE SHOULD ENCOURAGE
THIS FLEXIBILITY RATHER THAN
PREVENT IT, AND I THINK THAT A
YEAR OF RECEIVING THE DATA
REGARDING THIS WOULD BE
REGARDED TO MAKE A FULLY
INFORMED DECISION.
I'M NOT COMPLETELY OPPOSED TO
THE INTENT OF THIS AMENDMENT.
I'M JUST NOT COMFORTABLE
SUPPORTING IT AT THIS TIME.
I AM OPEN TO CONTINUED
CONVERSATION ABOUT WHETHER
CHANGES LIKE THIS ARE
NECESSARY, AND I WOULD LIKE TO
SEE HOW THE PROGRAM PLAYS OUT
BEFORE WE MAKE THOSE CHANGES.
COUNCILMEMBER PEDERSEN, I
APPRECIATE THIS AMENDMENT . I
APPRECIATE THE INTENT IT COMES
WITH.
I WON'T BE SUPPORTING IT TODAY,
AND I LEAVE THE DOOR OPEN TO
CONTINUE THIS CONVERSATION.
COLLEAGUES, ANY QUESTIONS?
VICE CHAIR MOSQUEDA?
>> I ALSO WANT TO THANK
COUNCILMEMBER PEDERSEN.
YOU GAVE ME A HEADS UP ON SOME
OF THE AMENITIES YOU ARE
CONSIDERING.
I APPRECIATE THEM BEING POSTED
ON THE AGENDA AS WELL.
I WANTED TO TELL YOU I'M SORRY
I WAS NOT ABLE TO GET A CHANCE
TO REVIEW THOSE UNTIL LATE LAST
NIGHT AND I DID NOT GET A
CHANCE TO ASK YOU SOME
QUESTIONS IN ADVANCED, BUT
COUNCILMEMBER, APPRECIATE THE
ONGOING INTENT, I BELIEVE, TO
TRY TO MAKE SURE THERE IS
GREATER CLARIFICATION THAT THE
DOLLARS ARE BEING USED FOR THE
LOWEST AFFORDABLE HOUSING.
I THINK THE CONCERN I HAVE
ECHOED WOULD BE THE GOOD CHAIR
THAT STRAUSS HAD SAID, AND THAT
IS A GREATER STAKEHOLDER INPUT
THAT IS NEEDED, BUT MOST
NOTABLY, AND I'M NOT SURE ALY,
IF YOU OR TERESA HAVE HAD A
CHANCE TO OPINE ON THIS.
MY CONCERN WITH THIS TYPE OF
RESTRICTION IS ALWAYS ABOUT
WHETHER OR NOT WE ARE LEAVING
OUT THE ABILITY FOR FUNDING
THAT ALLOWS FOR THE PROJECTS TO
BE FULLY FUNDED. I KNOW OUR
INTENT IS TO ALWAYS MAKE THOSE
UP FOR AS LOW AN INCOME
POPULATION AS POSSIBLE,
RECOGNIZING THOUGH THAT
SOMETIMES HAVING 60% TO 80% AMI
ON-SITE ALLOWS FOR THE CREATION
OF THE 0% TO 50% AMI HOUSING.
IN AN EFFORT TO TRY TO MAKE
THIS FOCUSED ON LOWEST INCOME
IF WE DON'T ALREADY HAVE THAT
SORT OF WORKFORCE HOUSING
ELEMENT INCLUDED, SOMETIMES IT
MAKES PROJECTS THAT EVEN
VIABLE, AND THAT IS MY CONCERN
WITH THAT AMENDMENT.
AND I DON'T KNOW, TERESA, OR
ALY, IF YOU HAVE ANY ADDITIONAL
COMMENTS ON THE VIABILITY OF
PROJECTS. I DON'T KNOW.
>> COUNCILMEMBER MOSQUEDA,
THANK YOU.
MOST OF THE CITY'S PROGRAMS TO
TARGET OR IN SOME CASES REQUIRE
A 60% OR BELOW AREA MEDIAN
INCOME.
FOR EXAMPLE, THE MANDATORY
HOUSING OF AFFORDABILITY
HOUSING REQUIRES NEW NETS MEET
60% AMI REQUIREMENT.
THIS AMENDMENT WOULD ACTUALLY
BE SIMILAR TO SOME OF THE
ALLOWANCES UNDER THE LOW INCOME
HOUSING TAX CREDIT PROGRAM
WHICH ALLOWS FOR SOME INCOME
AVERAGING, SO THIS AMENDMENT AS
DRAFTED WOULD ALLOW FOR THE
MIXING OF UNIT TYPES. SOME
COULD BE UP TO 80%, AND SOME
COULD BE AS LOW AS ZERO OR
ANYWHERE IN BETWEEN, AS LONG AS
THE OVERALL AVERAGE IS 60%, BUT
IT WOULD NOT ALLOW FOR, YOU
KNOW, A UNIT AND 90% AMI OR
THAT TYPE OF THING, SO IT DOES
ALLOW SOME FLEXIBILITY.
I THINK THE COMMITTEE HEARD IN
BRIEFING FROM DIRECTOR ALVARADO
OF HOUSING IS THAT THEY HAVE
ESTABLISHED THE 80% REQUIREMENT
IN PART BECAUSE IN LOOKING AT
THAT, THAT MAY BE AN OPTION
WHERE A RELIGIOUS ORGANIZATION
MIGHT BE ABLE TO SELF FUND THE
HOUSING PROJECT AND BE ABLE TO
SUSTAIN THAT WITHOUT PUBLIC
SUBSIDY.
HOWVER, IF THEY ARE SEEKING
PUBLIC FUNDS, IT'S LIKELY THE
AFFORDABILITY REQUIREMENTS
WOULD BE LOWER THAN 80% AMI IN
MOST CASES.
THAT IS SORT OF THE TRADE OFF I
THINK THAT THE DIRECTOR LAID
OUT FOR THE COMMITTEE IN THE
PREVIOUS DISCUSSION.
>> THANK YOU.
THAT WAS REALLY HELPFUL.
I THINK IT IS CLEAR IF CHARGES
OR DEVELOPING ORGANIZATIONS ARE
USING CITY FUNDS, THEY HAVE TO
PROVIDE AFFORDABLE HOUSING
BELOW 60% AREA MEDIAN INCOME .
THIS ADDITIONAL 20% ALLOWS FOR
SOME OF THAT FLEXIBILITY TO SEE
IF THEY WILL PROVIDE FOR THIS,
SO I JUST WANT TO CHECK
COUNCILMEMBER LEWIS, DO YOU
HAVE ANY QUESTIONS AT THIS
TIME?
>> I'M READY TO VOTE, MR.
CHAIR.
>> THANK YOU . COUNCILMEMBER
PEDERSEN, WOULD YOU LIKE TO
MAKE A MOTION?
>> THANK YOU.
I APPRECIATE THE DISCUSSION
TODAY.
I THINK THAT MY APPROACH WAS
THIS CAME FROM OLYMPIA, AND I
WAS TRYING TO TAILOR IT TO OUR
GOALS, WHICH I KNOW WE HOPE TO
HAVE MORE AFFORDABLE HOUSING,
WHICH WE MEAN BY LOBE INCOME
HOUSING.
I KNOW THERE ARE DIFFERENT
APPROACHES TO THAT.
I THINK IT IS THE RIGHT
AMENDMENT, WHICH IS WHY I PUT
IT FORWARD.
I'M SO HAPPY. IF FOR SOME
REASON, IT DOES NOT PASS TODAY,
HOPE THAT OTHER MOMENTS PASS OR
AT LEAST AMENDMENT FOUR SO WE
COULD MONITOR THIS AND FIND OUT
HOW IT IS BEING USED, BECAUSE I
THINK THAT, YOU KNOW, WE ARE
KIND FOR ME A BENEFIT TO
MARKETPLACE THAT DOES NOT EXIST
TODAY, AND I PERSONALLY THINK
WE SHOULD BE GETTING THAT
ADDITIONAL PUBLIC DEVELOPMENT
FOR LOWER INCOME HOUSING.
I APPRECIATE BEING ABLE TO MAKE
MY CASE TODAY TO THE COMMITTEE.
>> THANK YOU.
WOULD YOU LIKE TO MOVE?
>> I'M COMMITTED TO WORKING
WITH YOU ON ALL THAT.
>> WOULD YOU LIKE TO MOVE THE
AMENDMENT?
>> YES, THANK YOU, CHAIR.
I WOULD LIKE TO MOVE AMENDMENT
ONE AS SHOWN AS AN ATTACHMENT
TO TODAY'S AGENDA.
>> SECOND.
>> IT HAS BEEN MOVED AND
SECONDED.
MR. AN, WOULD YOU PLEASE CALL
THE ROLE.
>> COUNCILMEMBER PEDERSEN?
>> YES.
>> COUNCILMEMBER LEWIS?
>> YES.
>> COUNCILMEMBER MOSQUEDA?
>> NO.
>> CHAIR STRESS?
>> NO.
>> TWO IN FAVOR, TWO OPPOSED.
>> DOES THAT MOTION CARRY?
>> FAILED.
>> THAT MOTION FAILS.
THANK YOU.
MOTION FAILS.
COUNCILMEMBER PEDERSEN, WOULD
YOU LIKE TO COVER AMENDMENT
TWO?
>> THANK YOU, CHAIR STRESS.
AMENDMENT TWO, AS ALY HAD
DESCRIBED EARLIER WITH SIMPLY
EXTEND THE LENGTH OF THE
AFFORDABILITY PERIOD, SO RIGHT
NOW, STATE LAW VOTED THE
BIPARTISAN CRAFTERS OF THE
STATE LAW WROTE IT AS JUST 50
YEARS, AND I THINK PUBLIC
BENEFIT SHOULD GO ON FOR LONGER
TO 75 YEARS.
ANYBODY WHO HAS EXPERIENCE, I
NOTE THAT THE CHANGE FROM 50 TO
75 WILL NOT IMPACT THE ABILITY
TO SECURE FINANCING FOR THESE
TYPES OF PROJECTS, AND I THINK
THAT THIS WILL BE AN APPROPRIATE
PUBLIC BENEFIT, ADDITIONAL
PUBLIC BENEFIT FOR THE ZONING
BENEFIT THAT WE WOULD BE
CONFERRING WITH THIS
LEGISLATION, SO I'M HAPPY TO
ANSWER QUESTIONS.
THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU, COUNCILMEMBER
PEDERSEN.
I ALSO SHARE YOUR VALUE IN
HOPING THAT THESE, THE
AFFORDABILITY, THE AFFORDABLE
UNITS WILL BE HELD AS LONG AS
POSSIBLE IN PERPETUITY IF WE
CAN.
ONE TOOL I HAVE SEEN THE CITY
USE IS THAT, AS THE BUILDING
CONTINUES IN ITS LIFE, IT CAN
RECEIVE ADDITIONAL FUNDS FROM
THE OFFICE OF HOUSING, AND THAT
EXTENDS THE COVENANTS ON THE
DEED, SO IF A BUILDING IS BUILT
, AND WITHIN 50 YEARS AND NEEDS
UPGRADES OR IMPROVEMENTS IN ANY
WAY, TO USE OFFICE HOUSING
DOLLARS. THOSE ARE COVERED FOR
ANOTHER 50 YEARS.
KEEPING THOSE AFFORDABILITY
LEVELS FOR A LONGER PERIOD OF
TIME AND THAT 60% AREA MEDIAN
INCOME, YOU KNOW THIS.
I AM STATING THIS FOR THE
RECORD.
SO, I KNOW FROM A PROJECT IN MY
DISTRICT THAT I AM WORKING ON,
THERE IS SOME CONFUSION ABOUT
THE IMPLEMENTATION CURRENTLY OF
CURRENT LAW, SO BY MAKING THIS
CHANGE TODAY WITHOUT BEING ABLE
TO ENGAGE THE STAKEHOLDERS
AHEAD OF TIME, I BELIEVE THAT
IT IS ADDING MORE CONFUSION IN
THE TIME THAT WE NEED CLARITY
FOR THIS SPECIFIC PROJECT. SO,
AGAIN WITH THIS AMENDMENT, I
WON'T BE SUPPORTING IT TODAY,
AND I AM OPEN TO CONTINUING
CONVERSATION, BECAUSE I THINK
YOUR INTENT IS IN THE RIGHT
PLACE.
AND AT THIS TIME, I ALSO DON'T
BELIEVE THAT IMPOSING A HIGHER
BURDEN IN ORDER TO PARTICIPATE
IN THE PROGRAM IS NECESSARY
BECAUSE WE HAVE THAT SECONDARY
CHECK OF ENSURING THAT A
BUILDING THAT NEEDS RENOVATIONS
OR IMPROVEMENTS WILL THEN
CONTINUE AS LOW INCOME HOUSING
AFFORDABILITY.
COLLEAGUES, DO YOU HAVE
QUESTIONS, COMMENTS ON
AMENDMENT TWO? OR ALY, WOULD
YOU LIKE TO SHARE ANY OTHER
INFORMATION?
>> CHAIR STRAUSS, I THINK YOU
AND COUNCILMEMBER PEDERSEN
COVERED IT.
THANK YOU.
>> GREAT.
VICE CHAIR MOSQUEDA OR
COUNCILMEMBER LEWIS, ANY
QUESTIONS?
VICE CHAIR MOSQUEDA?
>> THIS IS MORE OF A QUESTION.
MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT THE
FIFTY-YEAR STANDARD IS THE
STANDARD LIFE OF THE INFORMAL
HOUSING PROJECT THAT ALL OTHER
OFFICE OF HOUSING PROJECTS
USUALLY ASSUME, SO IF WE HAD A
75 YEAR EXTENSION HERE, THAT
WOULD ONLY APPLY TO CHURCH
PROPERTIES.
IS THAT A DISCREPANCY?
>> YEAH.
COUNCILMEMBER MOSQUEDA, MOST
GROUNDS REQUIRE A 50 YEAR TERM,
AND AS COUNCILMEMBER PEDERSEN
DESCRIBE THE STATE STATUTE
REQUIRES AT LEAST A 50 YEAR
TERM, SO THAT IS THE MINIMUM
REQUIRED.
THE MANDATORY HOUSING
AFFORDABILITY PROGRAM FOR
DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS THAT
CHOOSE THE PERFORMANCE OPTION,
THAT DOES HAVE A 75 YEAR TERM
OF AFFORDABILITY.
THIS WOULD BE CONSISTENT WITH
THAT PROGRAM.
>> THANK YOU . GOOD QUESTION,
AND THANK YOU, ALY, FOR THAT
ADDITIONAL CLARIFICATION.
COUNCILMEMBER LEWIS, I SAW YOU
POP . I WAS WONDERING IF YOU
HAD ANY QUESTIONS?
>> I DON'T HAVE ANY QUESTIONS
AT THIS TIME.
>> COUNCILMEMBER PEDERSEN,
FINAL WORD?
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
APPRECIATE IT.
A REALLY GOOD DISCUSSION AND
GOOD POINT ABOUT HOW HOUSING
TYPICALLY DEALS WITH THE END OF
THE FIFTY-YEAR TERM IF THEY ARE
RENEWING THEIR FINANCING AND
RENEWING THAT REQUIREMENT THAT
AFFORDABILITY STAY ON FOR
ANOTHER 50 YEARS.
I WAS ALSO THINKING ABOUT, YOU
KNOW, WHEN THEY ARE NOT USING
OFFICE OF HOUSING MONEY, THEY
WOULD WANT THAT 75 YEARS, AND
IT WOULD BE CONSISTENT WITH
MANDATORY HOUSING AFFORDABILITY
PROGRAM ON-SITE, JUST TO
CLARIFY THAT.
THANK YOU FOR THIS DISCUSSION,
AND I WOULD LIKE TO MOVE
AMENDMENT TWO AS POSTED ON THE
AGENDA.
>> SECOND.
>> IT HAS BEEN MOVED AND
SECONDED TO AMEND COUNCIL BILL
120081 AS SHOWN IN AMENDMENT
TWO.
MR. AN, WILL YOU PLEASE CALL
ROLE?
>> COUNCILMEMBER PEDERSEN?
>> YES.
>> COUNCILMEMBER LEWIS?
>> YES.
>> COUNCILMEMBER MOSQUEDA?
>> NO.
>> CHAIR STRAUSS, NO.
>> TO FOUR, TWO OPPOSE.
>> MOTION FAILS.
I LOOK FORWARD TO WORKING WITH
YOU AS RECEIVE DATA FROM MM AND
FOUR, WHICH WILL PASS.
COUNCILMEMBER PEDERSEN, WOULD
YOU LIKE TO DISCUSS AMENDMENT
THREE?
>> THIS AMENDMENT IS A LITTLE
MORE COMPLICATED.
THE GOAL IS TO CLARIFY THE
STATE BILL, WHICH SIMPLY SAYS
OWNED OR CONTROLLED BY A
RELIGIOUS ORGANIZATION.
THE WORD "CONTROLLED BY" IS
VERY OPEN ENDED, SO WANT TO
MAKE SURE THAT THE RELATIONSHIP
AND THE RELIGIOUS INSTITUTIONS
MAINTAINED MEANINGFUL CONTROL
OF THEIR PROPERTIES, THAT THEY
ARE NOT TAKEN ADVANTAGE OF BY
FOR-PROFIT ENTITIES, AND THAT
THE INTENT OF THE LEGISLATION
WAS OWNED OR CONTROLLED BY, AND
WE WANT TO MAKE SURE IT'S
GOTTEN UNDER CONTROL, SO WE
INTEND TO DEFINE THAT IN THIS
AMENDMENT BY SAYING AN
ORGANIZATION WOULD HAVE TO --
AND THIS IS THE WAY WE WOULD
DEFINE IT FROM A LENDING
PERSPECTIVE, UNDERWRITING WHO
HAS CONTROL OF THE
ORGANIZATION, AND SO TYPICALLY
IT'S THE AMENDMENT WHICH IS AT
LEAST 51% OWNERSHIP OR THEY
HAVE A SPECIFIC MANAGEMENT ROLE
IN THE ORGANIZATION, SO IT
COULD BE ON THE 99% BY A FOR-
PROFIT LOW INCOME TAX INVESTOR,
WHICH IS STANDARD, BUT AS LONG
AS THE NONPROFIT OR RELIGIOUS
INSTITUTION HAS MANAGEMENT, SO
MANAGEMENT CONTROL SUCH AS, AND
THE AMENDMENT USES LANGUAGE
"SUCH AS" IT'S NOT OVERLY
RESTRICTIVE, SUCH AS A GENERAL
PARTNER IN A LIMITED
PARTNERSHIP OR SUCH AS A
MANAGER OF A LIMITED LIABILITY
COMPANY IN TERMS OF THE TWO
STANDARD OWNERSHIP ENTITIES. I
WOULD BE WILLING TO IN SOME
ADDITIONAL FLEXIBILITY INTO
DON'T HAVE A LOOPHOLE OF WHAT
THE WORD "CONTROLLED BY" MEANS.
THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU, COUNCILMEMBER
PEDERSEN . CONSISTENTLY WITH
THE TWO AMENDMENTS, I'M OPEN TO
CONTINUING THE CONVERSATION, AND
UNFORTUNATELY WILL NOT BE
SUPPORTING THE SENTIMENT AS
WELL.
I LIKE YOUR INTENT OF NARROWING
THE DEFINITION.
I THINK AS WE HEARD FROM BILL
RAMOS, THE CHAIR OF THE CHURCH
COUNCIL OF GREATER SEATTLE,
THAT WE NEED MORE TIME AND
CONVERSATION TO GET THIS RIGHT.
SPEAK LEGISLATION THAT THIS
BILL IS BASED ON WAS
INTENTIONALLY LEFT ABROAD IN
SETTING THE DEFINITION OF
CONTROLLED IN RECOGNITION THAT
FOR CHURCHES TO MAKE AFFORDABLE
HOUSING DEALS WORK, THEY OFTEN
HAVE TO BE CREATED AND HOW
THOSE DEALS ARE STRUCTURED.
I'M CONCERNED THIS DEFINITION
BEFORE US RIGHT NOW COULD BE TO
NARROW AND EXCLUDE PROJECT THAT
WOULD OTHERWISE BE ELIGIBLE TO
PROVIDE UNITS OF AFFORDABLE
HOUSING.
FOR EXAMPLE, IF A CHURCH WANTED
TO PARTNER WITH A NONPROFIT
AFFORDABLE HOUSING DEVELOPER
AND SELL THEIR PROPERTY TO THAT
DEVELOPER WHILE WORKING ON THE
PROJECT, THIS LIMIT COULD
PRECLUDE THEM FROM TAKING
ADVANTAGE OF THE BILL, WHICH
WOULD BE CONTRARY TO WHAT WE'RE
TRYING TO ACHIEVE AND WHAT THE
STATE HAS THIS LEGISLATION IN
ORDER FOR US TO ACHIEVE.
IT'S ALSO NOT CLEAR TO ME
EXACTLY HOW THIS AMENDMENT WILL
BE INTERPRETED AND IMPLEMENTED,
SOMETHING THAT I FOUND TIME AND
TIME AGAIN.
WE HAVE CERTAIN INTENTIONS HERE
WHEN WE PASS LAWS, AND THE
INTERPRETATION CAN OFTENTIMES
BE VERY DIFFERENT, AND THIS IS
THE ONE IMPORTANT ASPECT OF THE
WHEREAS NONBINDING CLOSET SO
WE'RE ABLE TO SHARE OUR INTENT
WITH THE LEGISLATION THAT COMES
AFTER THE WHEREAS CLAUSES.
I AM CONCERNED THIS AMENDMENT
COULD BE INTERPRETED TO PREVENT
A CHURCH FROM SIGNING ALONG
WITH THE NONPROFIT DEVELOPER OR
REQUIRE A CHURCH TO OWN AND
MANAGE THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING
UNITS THEMSELVES, WHICH IS A
JOB OFTEN LEFT TO HOUSING
PROVIDERS. THAT IS WHY, AGAIN,
I SUPPORT YOUR INTENT, CAN
SUPPORT THE SENTIMENT TODAY,
AND OPEN TO CONTINUING THE
CONVERSATION.
COLLEAGUES, DO YOU ALL HAVE
QUESTIONS, OR, ALY, IS THERE
ANYTHING YOU WOULD LIKE TO ADD ?
>> CHAIR STRAUSS, I DON'T HAVE
ANYTHING TO ADD AT THIS TIME.
I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER QUESTIONS.
>> GREAT.
SEEING NO QUESTIONS, VICE CHAIR
AND COUNCILMEMBER LEWIS,
COUNCILMEMBER PEDERSEN?
ANY LAST QUESTIONS?
WOULD YOU LIKE TO MOVE THE
AMENDMENT?
>> THANK YOU FOR MUCH,
COUNCILMEMBER.
EXCUSE ME.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
THANK YOU FOR AGAIN BRINGING
FORWARD THIS AMENDMENT, AND I
APPRECIATE AGAIN THE CHAIR'S
COMMENTS THROUGHOUT THIS ABOUT
THE INTENT BEHIND IT.
I DO WANT TO CONTINUE TO SEE
HOW WE CAN GET MORE CLARITY ON
WHETHER OR NOT THE INTENT IS
BEING ACHIEVED.
I THINK THE CONCERN I HAVE IS
SIMILAR TO WHAT THE CHAIR JUST
MENTIONED.
WE HAVE DONE A LOT OF WORK TO
FOLLOW UP ON THE STATE
LEGISLATIVE INTENT TO REDUCE
BARRIERS IN MAKING SURE THEY
CAN HAVE AS SIMPLE OF A PROCESS
TO PARTNER WITH AFFORDABLE
HOUSING DEVELOPERS BY A
NONPROFIT ORGANIZATION TO USE
THEIR PROPERTY TO CREATE WHAT
WE NEED IN THE CITY, WHICH IS
MORE AFFORDABLE HOUSING.
I DO WORRY ABOUT A DEFINITION
THAT COULD BE PERCEIVED AS
POTENTIALLY RESTRICTING THEM IN
HOW THEY PARTNER WITH THESE
ORGANIZATIONS TO CREATE THAT
AFFORDABLE HOUSING.
I THINK THERE'S ALREADY STRONG
AFFORDABILITY REQUIREMENTS HERE
WHILE PARTNERING WITH
ORGANIZATIONS AND NONPROFIT
DEVELOPERS THAT CAN HELP THEM
ACCOMPLISH WHAT THEY WOULD LIKE
TO SEE GROW ON THE SITE WILL
SERVE THOSE WHO, I THINK, THE
SPONSOR'S INTENT IS REALLY
TRYING TO CENTER THESE
AMENDMENTS ON, BUT I DON'T WANT
TO DO ANYTHING THAT
INADVERTENTLY ADDS ADDITIONAL
BARRIERS WHEN WE HAVE YET TO
SEE HOW THIS PARTNERSHIP IS
CURRENTLY GOING TO BE DEFINED,
SO LET'S DO EVERYTHING WE CAN
TO HELP THESE CHURCHES PARTNER
WITH ORGANIZATIONS TO BUILD
HOUSING.
THIS IS SOMETHING THAT I HAVE
BEEN HEARING ABOUT FOR THE LAST
THREE YEARS WORKING ON COUNCIL.
PEOPLE SAY, "I'VE GOT ALL THIS
TRACK PROPERTY.
HARDLY ANYONE DRIVES TO CHURCH
AND WERE.
THEY ARE WALKING, AND THEY WANT
TO USE THE SPACE, " SO LET'S DO
WHAT WE CAN TO TRANSFORM THAT
UNDERUTILIZED HOUSING.
>> THANK YOU.
COUNCILMEMBER LEWIS, ANY
THOUGHTS?
>> THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR.
>> COUNCILMEMBER PEDERSEN, LAST
WORD?
>> THANK YOU, CHAIR.
YES, I WOULD LIKE TO MOVE
AMENDMENT THREE AS POSTED ON
THE ONLINE AGENDA.
>> AND SECOND?
IT HAS BEEN MOVED AND SECONDED
TO AMEND COUNCIL BILL 120081 AS
SHOWN IN AMENDMENT THREE.
WILL THE CLERK PLEASE CALL THE
ROLE.
>> COUNCILMEMBER PEDERSEN?
>> YES.
>> COUNCILMEMBER LEWIS?
>> ABSTAIN.
>> COUNCILMEMBER MOSQUEDA?
>> NO.
>> CHAIR STRAUSS?
>> NO.
>> ONE IN FAVOR, TWO OPPOSE,
ONE ABSTAIN.
>> THE MOTION FAILS.
COUNCILMEMBER PEDERSEN, THANK
YOU FOR SENDING OUT THE
AMENDMENT FOUR TO COUNCIL BILL
120081 . I'M NOT SURE IF IT HAS
BEEN POSTED ON THE AGENDA.
I DON'T BELIEVE IT HAS, SO ALY,
COULD YOU START OFF BY WALKING
US THROUGH IT , AND THEN
COUNCILMEMBER PEDERSEN WILL
SPEAK TO IT.
>> I SHARED THE AMENDMENT ON
THE SCREEN.
VIEWABLE AND ZOOMED IN ENOUGH
FOR EVERYONE.
SO THIS AMENDMENT WOULD ADD A
NEW SECTION 2 COUNCIL BILL
120081, REQUESTING A REPORT
FROM THE OFFICE OF HOUSING AND
COORDINATION WITH THE SEATTLE
DEPARTMENT OF CONSTRUCTION AND
INSPECTIONS IN THE
IMPLEMENTATION OF THIS NEW
REQUIREMENT.
IT WOULD PROVIDE INFORMATION TO
THE COUNCIL ON THE TYPES OF
PROJECTS BEING BUILT UNDER
THESE NEW PROVISIONS, THE
OWNERSHIP STRUCTURE, HOW MUCH
OF THE BONUS PROVISIONS THEY
ARE TAKING ADVANTAGE OF IN THE
IMPLEMENTATION AND COULD INFORM
WHETHER OR NOT THE COUNCIL
ADJUSTMENTS ARE NEEDED TO THIS
LEGISLATION.
I WILL NOTE THAT COUNCILMEMBER
PEDERSEN CRAFTED AN AMENDMENT
TO TRY TO REDUCE THE
ADMINISTRATIVE BURDEN ON THE
OFFICE OF HOUSING , SO THE
RECORDING CADENCE MATCHES OTHER
ANNUAL REPORTING THAT THE
OFFICE OF HOUSING ALREADY
PROVIDES AND PUBLISHES ANNUALLY
IN MARCH EVERY YEAR, SO THIS
COULD BE INCORPORATED INTO
THOSE EXISTING REPORTS AND ALSO
AFTER THE FIFTH YEAR OF
REPORTING, WHICH COULD BE
EXTENDED AT THE COUNCIL'S
DISCRETION, BUT WOULD GO AWAY
AT SOME POINT IF THE COUNCIL
DETERMINED HOWEVER NECESSARY.
WITH THAT, I WILL TURN IT OVER
TO THE SPONSOR.
>> THANK YOU, AND COUNCILMEMBER
PEDERSEN?
>> THANK YOU, CHAIR STRAUSS ,
AND ALY FOR INTRODUCING THAT.
THAT WAS WELL SAID.
COLLEAGUES, THIS WILL ENABLE US
, AS THE CHAIR SET AT THE
BEGINNING, TO SEE HOW THE
ORDINANCE IS GOING, AND THEN
WHETHER WE NEED TO REFINE IT
BASED ON THE DATA, SO I REALLY
APPRECIATE YOUR SUPPORT FOR
THIS AMENDMENT TO TRACK THE NEW
ORDINANCE AND HOW IT IS
PERFORMING.
THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU, COUNCILMEMBER
PEDERSEN.
I WILL BE SUPPORTING THIS
AMENDMENT , AS I BELIEVE THE
DATA WILL HELP US IDENTIFY WHAT
WE NEED TO KNOW TO MAKE SURE
THAT THIS POLICY IS WORKING
EFFECTIVELY AND TO CONSIDER THE
CHANGES THAT YOU HAVE PUT
FORWARD IN AMENDMENTS ONE
THROUGH THREE.
COLLEAGUES, ANY COMMENTS,
QUESTIONS?
I AM SEEING THUMBS UP.
COUNCILMEMBER PEDERSEN, WOULD
YOU LIKE A FINAL WORD TO MOVE
THE AMENDMENT?
>> THANK YOU, TRAER STRAUSS.
I WOULD LIKE TO MOVE AMENDMENT
FOUR.
THAT IS THE EMAIL AND
PRESENTED ON THE SCREEN TODAY
AT OUR REMOTE MEETING.
THANK YOU.
>> SECOND.
>> IT HAS BEEN MOVED AND
SECONDED TO AMEND COUNCIL BILL
120081 AS SHOWN IN AMENDMENT
FOUR PEOPLE CLICK PLEASE CALL
ROLE?
>> COUNCILMEMBER PEDERSEN?
>> YES.
>> COUNCILMEMBER LEWIS?
>> YES.
>> COUNCILMEMBER COUNCILMEMBER
MOSQUEDA?
>> I.
>> ALL IN FAVOR, NOT OPPOSED.
>> COUNCILMEMBER PEDERSEN,
MOTION CARRIES.
ONE OF 4 TODAY.
THANK YOU FOR YOUR,
COUNCILMEMBER PEDERSEN, I
APPRECIATE ALL THE CONVERSATION
WE HAVE HAD THIS WEEK, IN THE
SPIRIT IN WHICH YOU BROUGHT
THESE AMENDMENTS , SO THANK
YOU, THANK YOU, THANK YOU.
IT IS ALWAYS A PLEASURE TO WORK
WITH YOU.
IS THERE ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION
ON THE UNDERLYING BILL AS
AMENDED?
COUNCILMEMBER PEDERSEN , TAKE
IT AWAY.
>> THANK YOU FOR THE DISCUSSION
TODAY.
I THINK IT'S REALLY HEALTHY TO
HAVE THIS TYPE OF DISCUSSION,
SO I APPRECIATE THE TIME AND
GRACE TO HAVE IT, AND ALSO,
JUST FOR THE VIEWING PUBLIC,
THIS BILL WAS ON THE AGENDA
DISCUSSED FOR ALMOST A MONTH OR
MORE THAN A MONTH, SO I FEEL
COMFORTABLE, YOU KNOW, MOVING
IT FORWARD.
I AM GOING TO ABSTAIN BECAUSE I
NEED TO THINK ABOUT THE BILL
THAT IS COMING OUT HERE I WILL
BE DOING AT FULL COUNCIL, I
DON'T KNOW.
I JUST NEED TIME TO THINK ABOUT
IT BECAUSE MY SUBSTANTIVE
AMENDMENTS DID NOT ADVANCE ON
AFFORDABILITY, SO I JUST WANT
TO EXPLAIN MY FORTHCOMING
ABSTENTION, BUT I APPRECIATE
THE DISCUSSION AND GETTING THAT
FOURTH AMENDMENT THROUGH.
THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU, COUNCILMEMBER
PEDERSEN.
WE ALWAYS APPRECIATE THE
ABSTENTION RATHER THAN THE
OPPOSITION AS IT CREATES AN
UNDIVIDED REPORT MOVING ON.
VICE CHAIR, COUNCILMEMBER
LEWIS, ANY THOUGHTS?
THUMBS UP?
SEEING ON.
>>> AT THE TIME, I MOVE THAT
THE COMMITTEE MOVE COUNCIL
COUNCIL BILL 120081 AS AMENDED.
IS THERE A SECOND?
>> IT HAS BEEN MOVED AND
SECONDED AND PASSAGE OF THE
BILL AS AMENDMENT.
IF THERE ARE NO ADDITIONAL
COMMENTS, PLEASE CALL ROLE.
>> COUNCILMEMBER PEDERSEN?
>> ABSTAIN.
>> COUNCILMEMBER LEWIS?
>> YES.
>> COUNCILMEMBER MOSQUEDA?
>> AYE.
>> CHAIR STRAUSS?
>> YES.
>> THREE IN FAVOR, ONE
ABSTENTION.
>> THE MOTION CARRIES ON
COUNCIL BILL 120081.
WE WILL BE BACK FOR FINAL VOTE.
THANK YOU FOR EVERYONE CALLING
IN. EVERYONE AT THE OFFICE OF
HOUSING AND EVERYONE WORKING TO
CREATE MORE AFFORDABLE HOUSING
IN THE CITY OF SEATTLE.
>>> MOVING TO OUR NEXT AGENDA
ITEM, A BRIEF DISCUSSION AND
VOTE ON THE LANDMARK ORDINANCE
FOR THE BORDEAUX HOUSE.
MR. AN, WILL YOU READ THE
ABBREVIATED TITLE INTO THE
RECORD.
TOWING
>> COUNCIL BILL 120160 AND
EVIDENCE RELATED TO THE HISTORIC
PRESERVATION AND IMPOSING
CONTROLS ON BORDEAUX HOUSE,
LANDMARK DESIGNATED BY THE
LANDMARKS PRESERVATION BOARD .
>> THANK YOU, AND WE ARE JOINED
BY ERIN DOHERTY OF THE
DEPARTMENT OF NEIGHBORHOODS,
LISH WHITSON OF THE
COUNCILMEMBER STAFF, AND WE'RE
SEEING COUNCILMEMBER LEWIS BE
EXCUSED AS HE LET US KNOW
BEFORE THE MEETING.
YOU ARE EXCUSED, COUNCILMEMBER
LEWIS.
FOR THIS AGENDA ITEM FROM ERIN
DOHERTY , AS I MENTIONED, LISH
WHITSON AND KATIE AND SCOTT
RENSCHLER ARE THE OWNERS OF THE
BORDEAUX HOUSE.
ERIN, WOULD YOU LIKE TO TAKE US
AWAY ON THE PRESENTATION AND
INCLUDE KATIE AND SCOTT AS
APPROPRIATE?
>> THANKS, THANK YOU.
I THINK KATIE AND SCOTT ARE ON
THE PHONE WITH US.
THEY ARE HERE JOINING US TODAY
AND HAPPY TO ANSWER QUESTIONS
IF THERE ARE ANY, AND I JUST
WANT TO CONFIRM ARE YOU ABLE TO
SEE THE SLIDE PRESENTATION?
>> YES, WE ARE.
WE SEE SCOTT HAS CALLED IN AS
WELL.
>> I THINK BOTH SCOTT AND KATIE
ARE ON THE LINE.
>> GOOD MORNING.
>> GREAT.
THIS ORDINANCE IS TO CODIFY THE
CONTROLS AND INCENTIVES
AGREEMENT THAT WAS SIGNED BY
THE PROPERTY OWNERS AND THE
HISTORIC PRESERVATION OFFICER.
THE LANDMARK NOMINATION WAS
SUBMITTED BY THE OWNERS.
SO, JUST AS A BRIEF REMINDER,
YOU SEE THE DESIGNATION
STANDARDS IN THE PAST FOR OTHER
LANDMARKS.
THERE ARE SIX OF THEM, A, B,
SEE, D, E, AND F, AND THE BOARD
NEEDS TO CHOOSE AT LEAST ONE OF
THE STANDARDS IN ADDITION TO
DETERMINING THAT THE PROPERTY
POSSESSES THE INTEGRITY OUR
ABILITY TO CONVEY ITS
SIGNIFICANCE.
SO, TODAY, WE'RE LOOKING AT THE
BORDEAUX HOUSE AT 806 14th
AVENUE EAST.
THIS WAS DESIGNATED BY THE
LANDMARKS PRESERVATION BOARD ON
JANUARY 6th, 2021.
THEY SELECTED STANDARDS D AND
E, SO THEY RECOGNIZE IT FOR ITS
DISTINCT ARCHITECTURAL STYLE
AND AS AN OUTSTANDING WORK OF A
DESIGNER OR BUILDER.
THE DESIGNATED FEATURES
SELECTED BY THE BOARD INCLUDE A
SITE, THE EXTERIOR OF THE
HOUSE, ANY PORTION OF THE
INTERIOR, WHICH INCLUDES THE
MAIN ENTRY AND THE GRAND STAIR
CONNECTS THE FIRST AND SECOND
FLOORS.
THE BORDEAUX HOUSE IS AN
ECLECTIC TO THE REVIVAL STYLE
INCORPORATING QUEEN ANNE STYLE
UNDERWENT LIKE THE PROMINENT
CORNER TURRET WITH A BELL
SHAPED ROOF.
THE HOUSE WAS DESIGNED BY
WILLIAM KIMBALL BUILT IN 1903
FOR A COST OF $15,000.
THE HOUSE WAS EXTENSIVELY
REMODELED, AND TWO ADDITIONS
MADE AT THE REAR OF THE HOUSE
ONLY 10 YEARS LATER.
THIS PROJECT WAS UNDERTAKEN BY
THE SAME OWNERS OF THE HOUSE
AND DESIGNED BY THE FIRM AT
GREAT EXPENSE.
NEARLY HALF OF THE ORIGINAL
CONSTRUCTION COST.
ALTHOUGH A NUMBER OF EARLY
ALTERATIONS WERE MADE TO THE
HOUSE EXTERIOR, THE OVERALL
CHARACTER AND OUTWARD
APPEARANCE OF THE HOUSE IS VERY
SIMILAR TO THE ORIGINAL, AS YOU
CAN SEE IN THE TWO PHOTOGRAPHS.
ARCHITECT WILLIAM KIMBALL
PRACTICED IN THE MIDWEST BEFORE
COMING TO SEATTLE IN 1901, AND
PRIOR TO THE BORDEAUX HOUSE,
HE DESIGNED A HOME FOR
INFLUENTIAL REAL ESTATE
INVESTOR, JAMES MOORE, WHICH IS
LOCATED ACROSS THE STREET FROM
THE SUBJECT PROPERTY AND IS
ALSO A LOCAL LANDMARK.
THIS NEIGHBORHOOD IS PART OF AN
AFFLUENT RESIDENTIAL ON CLOTH
DEVELOPED BY MR. MOORE,
DIRECTLY SOUTH OF VOLUNTEER
PARK.
THE FIRM OF BEV AND MENTAL WILL
LIKELY PROPOSE AMENDMENTS TO
THE HOUSE AS MR. CAMPBELL DIED
IN 1907.
THEY ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR OTHER
BUILDINGS AROUND SEATTLE,
INCLUDING THE FIRST CHURCH OF
CHRIST SCIENTIST AT COBBLE
HILL, AND THE OLD FIRE STATION
NUMBER 18 IN BALLARD.
THAT IS IT.
>> THANK YOU, ERIN.
THE OLD FIRE STATION IN
BALLARD, WENT BALLARD HAD ITS
OWN FIRE DEPARTMENT AS ITS OWN
CITY.
SCOTT AND KATIE, I WANT TO
THANK YOU FOR BRINGING THIS
FORWARD, BRINGING THIS TO US.
GIRL AND WAS ABLE TO WALK US
THROUGH THE PACKET THAT SHE
SUBMITTED, SHOWING PICTURES OF
THE INTERIOR WITH THE OAK
INLAYS AND THE STAIRCASE AND
ENTRY ROOM IN WHICH YOU ARE
HOPING TO ALSO HAVE CONTROLS
AND INCENTIVES PUT IN PLACE. IT
IS INCREDIBLY GORGEOUS HE WOULD
WOULD YOU LIKE TO TALK ABOUT
WHY YOU HAVE BROUGHT THIS
FORWARD, THE IMPORTANCE THAT
YOU SEE IN PRESERVING THE
HISTORIC NATURE OF YOUR HOME,
AND ANYTHING ELSE YOU WOULD
LIKE TO ADD?
>> SHARE.
THANK YOU SO MUCH, CHAIR STRAUSS
AND THE WHOLE COMMITTEE AND THE
SEATTLE CITY COUNCIL.
AND THE LANDMARKS PRESERVATION
BOARD AS WELL FOR CONSIDERING
THIS NOMINATION.
WE CONSIDER OURSELVES STEWARDS
OF THE HOUSE, AND WE HAVE HAD
THE OPPORTUNITY TO INTERACT WITH
, COMMUNICATE WITH MAC MEMBERS
OF THE PRIOR FIVE FAMILIES THAT
OCCUPIED THE HOUSE.
ALL FIVE OF THEM, INCLUDING THE
FAMILY OF THE DESCENDENTS OF
THOMAS PORTO, WHO WAS A FRENCH
CANADIAN IMMIGRANT, WHO MADE
HIS FORTUNE IN SEATTLE IN THE
TIMBER BUSINESS.
AND WE SEE PRESERVING HOMES
LIKE THIS AS A WAY OF
PRESERVING STORIES ABOUT SEATTLE
, AND PART OF THE JOY WE TOOK
IN THIS PROJECT IS GETTING TO
KNOW THE STORIES OF EACH OF THE
FIVE FAMILIES THAT HAD OCCUPIED
THE HOUSE BEFORE WE DID.
WE SEE OURSELVES AS STEWARDS
WHO ARE JUST PASSING THROUGH,
LEAVING A LEGACY FOR OTHER
FAMILIES WHO HAVE COME AFTER US
IN THE FUTURE.
SO THANK YOU FOR YOUR
CONSIDERATION AND YOUR TIME
TODAY.
>> THANK YOU, SCOTT, AND THANK
YOU FOR YOUR PERSPECTIVE ON
BEING STEWARDS OF THE SPACE
THAT YOU OCCUPY.
REALLY APPRECIATE THAT.
I WISH AND HOPE FOR MORE TO
EMULATE YOU IN THAT WAY.
COLLEAGUES, DO WE HAVE ANY
QUESTIONS FOR, OR LISH, DO YOU
HAVE ANY THOUGHTS?
>> NO.
>> COLLEAGUES, ANY QUESTIONS
FOR ERIN, CW 36.78.545, SCOTT,
OR KATIE?
SEEING NONE.
SCOTT AND KATIE, YOUR PACKET
YOU PUT TOGETHER WAS INCREDIBLE
, SO I THINK THAT HAS ANSWERED
MANY OF THE QUESTIONS BEFORE
US.
SO, WITH THAT, SCOTT, DO YOU
HAVE ANYTHING ELSE TO ADD AT
THIS TIME OR ERIN?
>> WE'RE JUST GRATEFUL FOR ALL
THE SUPPORT WE HAVE RECEIVED.
WE HAD A LOT OF PROFESSIONAL
HELP WITH THE APPLICATION, AND
APPRECIATE ERIN'S SUPPORT AS
WELL AND YOUR CONSIDERATION.
THANK YOU SO MUCH.
>> THANK YOU.
SEEING AS THERE IS NO FURTHER
DISCUSSION, WE CAN NOW VOTE ON
THIS LANDMARK ORDINANCE AND
MOVE THE COMMITTEE RECOMMEND
PASSAGE OF COUNCIL BILL 120160.
IS THERE A SECOND?
>> SECOND.
>> IT HAS BEEN MOVED AND
SECOND.
IF THERE ARE NO ADDITIONAL
COMMENTS, WILL THE CLERK PLEASE
CALL THE ROLE?
>> COUNCILMEMBER PEDERSEN?
>> YES.
>> COUNCILMEMBER MOSQUEDA?
>> AYE.
>> CHAIR STRAUSS.
>> MOTION CARRIES.
THANK YOU, SCOTT AND KATIE FOR
BRINGING THIS FORWARD.
THANK YOU GIRL ERIN AND LISH
FOR BRINGING THIS TO US AGAIN.
THIS WILL BE BROUGHT TO CITY
COUNCIL ON MONDAY, JUNE 20th.
>> THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME.
>> THANK YOU SO MUCH .
>>> OUR FINAL AGENDA ITEM TODAY
IS A BRIEFING REPORT ON SDCI'S
EARLY PERMITTING REPORTS,
SOMETHING I'M VERY INTERESTED IN
. MR. AN, WILL YOU READ THE
ITEM INTO THE RECORD?
>> AGENDA ITEM THREE, SEATTLE
DEPARTMENT OF CONSTRUCTION AND
INSPECTION RACIAL EQUITY REPORT
.
>> AS YOU RECALL AND THE 2021
BUDGET, I INCLUDED A STATEMENT
OF LEGISLATIVE REPORT THAT THE
SDCI REPORT TO THE COMMITTEE ON
A QUARTERLY BASIS FOR REVIEW
TIMES AND PROGRESS TOWARDS
SPEEDING UP THESE REVIEW
PERMITTING DECISIONS. THIS IS
SDCI'S SECOND QUARTERLY REPORT
TO THE COMMITTEE, AND WE ARE
JOINED BY DIRECTOR NATHAN TOTAL
SAID, THE LAND-USE DIRECTOR AND
THE ENGINEERING SERVICE
DIRECTOR ALL FROM SDCI . WOULD
YOU ALL LIKE TO BEGIN AND WALK
US THROUGH THIS PRESENTATION?
>> GREAT.
I WILL BEGIN AGAIN, NATHAN
TORGELSON, DIRECTOR OF SDCI.
GOOD MORNING, COUNCILMEMBERS.
I AM JUST GOING FORWARD TO THE
NEXT SLIDE.
AGAIN, SDCI'S PURPOSE IS TO
HELP PEOPLE BUILD A SAFE,
LIVABLE, AND INCLUSIVE SEATTLE
, AND OUR VALUES ARE EQUITY.
WE LEAD WITH RACE, AND WE VERY
SERIOUSLY LOOK AT PERMITTING
THROUGH THE RACE AND SOCIAL
JUSTICE LENS, AND OUR OTHER
VALUES ARE RESPECT, EQUALITY,
INTEGRITY, AND SERVICE.
SO, JUST A REMINDER TO THE
VIEWING PUBLIC, A LOT OF YOU
THINK OF US AS ISSUING PERMITS
AND ADMINISTERING THE DESIGNER
REVIEW PROGRAM, BUT WE'RE ALSO
VERY INVOLVED WITH CODEVELOPMENT
WITH CODE ENFORCEMENT.
THIS INCLUDES TENANT
PROTECTION, RENTAL REGISTRATION
INSPECTION ORDINANCE PROGRAM,
AND THE VACANT BUILDING
MONITORING PROGRAM, AND WE'RE
INVOLVED ALMOST EVERY DAY IN
THE COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT.
SO, JUST A REFRESHER ON OUR
PERMIT PROCESSES. A LOT OF
APPLICANTS WILL GO THROUGH A
MASTER USE PERMIT PROCESS AND
THE CONSTRUCTION PERMIT PROCESS
. IF SOMEWHAT IS SUBJECT TO A
MASTER USE PERMIT PROCESS, THIS
IS TYPICALLY A DESIGN REVIEW OR
SOME KIND OF LAND-USE APPROVAL
PROCESS SUCH AS A VARIANCE.
YOU WOULD FIRST APPLY FOR A
MASTER USE PERMIT. THERE IS A
PRE-APPLICATION, INTAKE
APPOINTMENT, REVIEWS, A DECISION
, POTENTIALLY AN APPEAL TO THE
HEARING EXAMINER, AND ISSUANCE,
AND IT IS REALLY THE
APPLICANT'S CALL ON WHEN THEY
APPLY FOR A CONSTRUCTION PERMIT
. IN A VERY HOT MARKET, THE
CONSTRUCTION PERMIT WILL COME
SHORTLY AFTER THE MASTER USE
PERMIT, BUT THE APPLICANTS CAN
CERTAINLY WAIT UNTIL THAT
MASTER USE PERMIT IS ISSUED
BEFORE THEY SUBMIT FOR A
CONSTRUCTION PERMIT.
BUT AGAIN, THE TWO OFTEN OCCUR
CONCURRENTLY.
SO, ONCE A PERMIT COMES IN,
THERE ARE MULTIPLE REVIEW
LOCATIONS WITHIN SDCI, AS YOU
CAN SEE ON THE SLIDE HERE AND
THERE ARE NUMEROUS PLACES WERE
A PERMIT WOULD BE ROUTED, AND
AGAIN, IT DEPENDS ON THE TYPE
OF PROJECT AND THE COMPLEXITY
OF THE PROJECT.
PERMITS ARE ALSO ROUTED TO
OTHER CITY DEPARTMENTS AS
APPROPRIATE, AND THIS CAN
INCLUDE SDOT, IT MIGHT INCLUDE
FINANCE SERVICES IF THERE ARE
ISSUES, THE OFFICE OF HOUSING,
DEPARTMENT OF NEIGHBORHOODS,
AND IF A PROJECT IS ADJACENT TO
A CITY PARK, IT WILL ALSO BE
ROUTED TO OUR PARKS DEPARTMENT.
>> THANK YOU, AND DIRECTOR
TORGELSON, I THINK I MENTIONED
IT IS IN OUR PREMEETING
BRIEFING , THAT THE NEXT REPORT
, IT WOULD BE GREAT TO HAVE
THESE OTHER DEPARTMENTS JOIN US
TO UNDERSTAND WHAT THE STAFFING
LEVELS ARE OF EACH. MAYBE WE
CAN GO BACK TO SLIDE SIX AS
WE'RE SPEAKING ABOUT THIS.
IT IS IMPORTANT, AS I LEARNED
IN THE LAST PERMITTING REPORT,
THAT SOME OF THESE DIVISIONS
WITHIN THE DEPARTMENTS HAVE 4
MEMBERS OF THEIR TEAM, AND SOME
HAVE 20 MEMBERS OF THEIR TEAM,
AND IF A TEAM ONLY HAS 4
MEMBERS, AND 1ú RETIRES, LEAVE
THE OFFICE, OR THAT POSITION IS
VACANT, IT CAN CREATE A
BACKLOG MORE SIGNIFICANT THAN
14 PEOPLE.
IT IS IMPORTANT THAT I WOULD
LIKE TO INVITE THESE OTHER
DEPARTMENTS TO OUR NEXT
PERMITTING REPORT MEETING SO
THAT WE CAN HAVE A GOOD
UNDERSTANDING OF WHICH OF THESE
DIVISIONS AND TEAMS NEED
ADDITIONAL STAFF SO THAT WE CAN
ENSURE THAT WE'RE ABLE TO MOVE,
PERMIT, PROCESSES THROUGH TO
APPROVAL AS QUICKLY AS
POSSIBLE, AND THESE UNINTENDED
BACKLOGS ARE CREATED BY ISSUES
THAT WE CAN RESOLVE.
>> GREAT.
>> THANK YOU.
>> VERY MUCH APPRECIATED.
THIS IS THE SLIDE THAT
BASICALLY DISCUSSES A PROJECT
THAT'S UNDERWAY TO REVISE THE
WAY WE CURRENTLY COMMUNICATE
NECESSARY CORRECTIONS.
CURRENTLY, WE WRITE CORRECTION
LETTERS WITH FOCUS PLAN REVIEW.
UNFORTUNATELY, THAT TOOL IS
BUILT ON ALL TECHNOLOGY AND IS
REALLY GETTING END OF LIFE, AND
THERE'S AN OPPORTUNITY TO MOVE
INTO THIS NEW TOOL CALLED BLUE
BEAM, WHICH WILL ALLOW US TO
ACTUALLY MARK UP PLANS THAT ARE
SUBMITTED WITHIN THE TOOL AND
HAVE THOSE MARKUPS BE
HYPERLINKED TO CORRECTION ITEMS
THAT ARE GENERATED IN THE
CORRECTION LETTER, SIMILAR TO
THE WAY WE DO IT TODAY, BUT
WITH ADDED FUNCTIONALITY THAT
YOU CAN LOOK AT THE PLAN ITSELF
AND GO TO THE CORRECTION ITEM
IN THE CORRECTION LETTER, OR
YOU CAN GO BACKWARDS, VICE
VERSA.
OUR HOPE WITH THIS IS TO MAKE
IT MORE EFFICIENT FOR PLAN
REVIEWERS TO COMMUNICATE WITH
APPLICANTS. CLEARLY, WHERE
CORRECTIONS ARE REQUIRED, IF
THEY CAN RESPOND IN KIND TO
EACH OF THOSE CORRECTIONS AND
BE ABLE TO DO THAT IN A MORE
EFFICIENT WAY, HOPEFULLY TO
REDUCE THE CYCLING OF
CORRECTIONS, THE NUMBER OF
TIMES A CORRECTION LETTER NEEDS
TO BE WRITTEN OVER AND OVER
AGAIN BECAUSE OF LACK OF
RESPONSE TO OUTSTANDING
CORRECTIONS.
THIS PROJECT IS CURRENTLY
UNDERWAY.
THE GOAL IS TO REDUCE
CORRECTIONS CYCLES.
WE'VE ALREADY ROLLED OUT
LICENSES WERE A NUMBER OF PLAN
REVIEWERS, SO THEY ARE USING A
TOOL AS A VIEWER AS OPPOSED TO
ADOBE PRO, WHERE YOU CAN VIEW
THOSE PDFS THAT ARE SUBMITTED
AS PART OF THE APPLICATIONS,
AND WE'RE FULLY INTEGRATING IT
WITH OUR EXCEL IMPLEMENTATIONS,
SO WHEN CORRECTION LETTERS ARE
WRITTEN AND CORRECTIONS ARE
REVIEWED, THAT THOSE LETTERS
AND THOSE DOCUMENTS WILL UPLOAD
INTO OUR ELECTRONIC DOCUMENT
AND NOTIFY THE APPLICANT RIGHT
OF WAY AS SOON AS AVAILABLE. WE
HAVE PARTNERED WITH OTHER
JURISDICTIONS AROUND STATE.
A LOT OF MY TEAM USE BLUE BEAM.
A LOT OF STUFF WE ARE ACQUIRED
OVER THE LAST FEW YEARS HAVE
WORKED IN THOSE OTHER
JURISDICTIONS AND HAVE A LOT OF
EXPERIENCE WITH IT ALREADY, SO
WE'RE UTILIZING, TAPPING INTO
THE EXPERTISE TO MOVE THIS BALL
FORWARD.
HOPEFULLY, WE'LL HAVE THIS
READY TO GO FULLY IN SEPTEMBER.
>> VICE CHAIR MOSQUEDA? I'M
NOTICING ON SEATTLE CHANNEL,
PREVIOUSLY, OUR FACES WERE
INCLUDED NEXT TO THE SLIDES AS
WE WERE PRESENTING.
I'M NOT SEEING THAT OCCURRING
TODAY, SO WHEN YOU DO SPEAK,
MAYBE JUST AN OUNCE YOUR NAME
SO THAT I KNOW THE DIFFERENCE
BETWEEN DIRECTOR TORGELSON AND
ANDI'S VOICES, BUT THE PUBLIC
MIGHT NOT.
VICE CHAIR, TAKE IT AWAY.
>> THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR.
I WONDER IF THAT BUTTON HAS
INADVERTENTLY NOT BEEN HIT.
SO, I WANTED TO JUST CHECK IN
HERE ON THESE FIRST FEW SLIDES.
I GUESS MY BIGGEST QUESTION IS
WHAT HAVE WE BEEN DOING ON THE
MacROLEVEL TO SET BETTER TARGETS
? THE TWO PRIOR SLIDES DID NOT
HAVE ANY TIMELINES ASSOCIATED
WITH THAT FLOWCHART, SO I WOULD
LIKE TO KNOW WHAT REVIEW
TARGETS WE'RE SPECIFICALLY
TRIED TO HIT TO MAKE SURE
PERMIT ISSUED BY SDCI ARE BEING
ADDRESSED AS QUICKLY AS
POSSIBLE, HOW DID THE
DEPARTMENT ARRIVE AT THESE
TARGETS, AND IS THERE ANY WAY
TO ADVISE THESE TARGETS, GIVEN
THE PREVIOUS PRESENTATION WE
SAW WAS SUCH A DECREASED
NUMBER.
QUITE FRANKLY, THE CONCERN ABOUT
REVENUE BEING LOST AND ALSO THE
IMPACT IN SMALL BUSINESSES AND
ORGANIZATIONS.
I HAVE BEEN CONTACTED BY A
BUSINESS AND LOWER QUEEN ANNE
IN THE BAY AREA WHO WAS
BASICALLY TOLD IT WOULD TAKE
SIX MONTHS TO GET HIS BUSINESS
REOPENED POST-PANDEMIC, AND
THAT JUST SEEMS LIKE THAT'S
GOING TO BE A NAIL IN THE
COFFIN IF HE'S NOT ABLE TO MEET
MORE ASSISTANCE IN A FASTER
WAY, ESPECIALLY IN THE POST-
PANDEMIC REOPENING WORLD.
IS GOING TO TAKE IN SIX MONTHS.
HE'S WORRIED ABOUT STAYING
AFLOAT, SO DO YOU HAVE ANY
TYPES OF TARGETS WE CAN NOTE IN
THE POST-COVID WORLD AND ANY
DATA ON THE TYPES OF BUSINESSES
SUBMITTING APPLICATIONS, AND A
PORTION OF THOSE APPLICATIONS
ARE SMALL BUSINESSES OR HOUSING.
I GUESS, I MEAN, JUST AN
OVERALL GENERAL UPDATE SINCE
THE LAST TIME WE HAVE BEEN HERE
BECAUSE IT LOOKS LIKE BLUE BEAM
IS SORT OF THE MAIN THING YOU
ARE REPORTING OUT THAT IS
DIFFERENT FROM THE LAST TIME.
ARE THERE ANY OTHER IDEAS
BESIDES THE BLUE BEAM EFFORT TO
REPORT PROGRESS ON THE FIRST
QUARTERLY REPORT?
>> REALLY APPRECIATE YOUR
QUESTIONS. WE HAVE SEVERAL
ADDITIONAL SLIDES THAT DO
ADDRESS SOME OF THE ISSUES YOU
ARE RAISING.
WE ARE HAPPY TO ENTERTAIN THOSE
QUESTIONS NOW, OR WE CAN
CONTINUE WITH THE PRESENTATION
AND ANSWER THOSE QUESTIONS AT
THE END. WHATEVER IS YOUR
PREFERENCE.
>> MR. CHAIR?
>> LET'S SEE BECAUSE I KNOW
THOSE QUESTIONS ARE ADDRESSED
IN SOME OF THE UPCOMING SLIDES
BECAUSE VICE CHAIR MOSQUEDA,
YOUR QUESTION IS SPOT ON.
WHAT ARE THE TARGETS?
DO THEY NEED TO BE REVISED?
AND HOW DO WE PROCESS THOSE?
THOSE ARE THREE POINTS I WOULD
LIKE TO REALLY HAVE A FINE-
TUNED ANSWER TO BEFORE WE MOVE
INTO THE BUDGET PROCESS THIS
COMING FALL.
>> MR. CHAIR, I HAVE REVIEWED
THE SLIDES.
I AM AWARE OF THE FULL
PRESENTATION AND HAVE TAKEN A
LOOK AT ALL THIS LIKE THERE.
MR. TORGELSON, I WANT TO MAKE
SURE TO HAVE QUESTIONS FOR THE
FOLLOWING SLIDES THAT I
APPRECIATE THE DIRECTION, MR.
CHAIR.
I WOULD HAPPILY WAIT FOR YOUR
ADVICE.
>> GREAT.
>> SOME OF THE KEY PERMITTING
TAKEAWAYS, WE ARE MEETING MANY
OF OUR PERMITTING GOALS, BUT AS
COUNCILMEMBER MOSQUEDA POINTED
OUT, OTHER GOALS WE ARE NOT
MEETING, SOME OF THOSE ARE DUE
TO STAFFING SHORTAGES IN KEY
REVIEW LOCATIONS, AND SOME ARE
DUE TO OTHER REASONS THAT WE'LL
HIT UPON LATER.
SDCI EXPERIENCED A HUGE
SIGNIFICANT VESTING RUSH IN THE
FIRST QUARTER OF THIS YEAR. IF
YOU RECALL, THE CITY ADAPTED
NEW TECHNICAL CODE LEGISLATION
THAT WENT INTO EFFECT MARCH
15th.
THIS IS NO BUILDING CODE
REGULATIONS, MECHANICAL CODE,
AND PROBABLY THE MOST
SIGNIFICANT WITH THE NEW ENERGY
CODE REGULATIONS, SO WE HAD A
HUGE RUSH OF BUILDING PERMITS
THAT CAME IN BEFORE THE
EFFECTIVE DATE OF MARCH 15th.
SO, WE ARE EXTREMELY BUSY
REVIEWING AND PROCESSING THOSE
BUILDING PERMITS.
WHAT WE'RE SEEING NOW IS MUCH
LOWER PERMITTING VOLUMES AND
EVALUATIONS, BUT SORT OF
LOOKING AT A FORECAST FOR THE
MONTHS AHEAD. ME TO EXPECT THOSE
PERMIT VOLUMES TO PICK BACK UP
AGAIN. MOST TRADE PERMIT TYPES
HAVE RETURNED TO PRE-PANDEMIC
ISSUE AT TIMES, AND BY TRADE
PERMITS, I MEAN THINGS LIKE
BOILERS, REFRIGERATION,
ELECTRICAL, MECHANICAL ELEVATOR
. SOME OF THOSE ARE ONE TIME
PERMITS JUST ASSOCIATED WITH
CONSTRUCTION. SOME OF THOSE
PERMITS ARE ANNUALS.
FOR EXAMPLE, WE INSPECT
ELEVATORS ON AN ANNUAL BASIS.
DESPITE, YOU KNOW, THE
CHALLENGES OF LAST YEAR, SDCI'S
INTAKE TO ISSUANCE REVIEW TIMES
AND THE NUMBER OF REVIEW CYCLES
HAVE REMAINED FAIRLY
CONSISTENT, BUT AGAIN, WE
RECOGNIZE THAT WE NEED TO
IMPROVE ON THAT AS WE GO
FORWARD AND AS WE GET OUT OF
THE COVID SITUATION.
>> AND DIRECTOR OFFICE OF
HOUSING AND ANDY, IF YOU COULD
ADDRESS THE QUESTIONS, THAT
WOULD BE GREAT.
>> THIS IS ANDY HIGGINS.
THIS SLIDE IS TALKING ABOUT THE
WORK THAT WE HAVE DONE OVER
THE PAST DECADE TO CONTINUOUSLY
IMPROVE OUR PROCESSES AND TRY
TO REDUCE OUR HANDLING OF THE
PERMIT OBLIGATIONS AND THE TIME
THAT IS SPENT IN SDCI OR THE
CITY'S HANDS.
YOU CAN SEE OVER THE COURSE OF
TIME, THE PERCENTAGE OF TIME ,
THAT BLACKLINE DECREASE IS THE
AMOUNT OF TIME IT'S IN OUR
HANDS RELATIVE TO THE OVERALL
INPUT TIME FROM INTAKE TO
ISSUANCE DUE TO THE FACT WHEN
WE CHECKED OUR CORRECTIONS,
THERE'S AN ASPECT OF THAT TIME
WE HAVE NO CONTROL OVER.
YOU CAN SEE THAT OVER THE DECADE
, AS THE ECONOMY SPED UP, THE
OVERALL TIME DID INCREASE, AND
I THINK YOU ARE SEEING A LITTLE
PLATEAU AND DECREASE HERE ON
THE SIMPLE AND MEDIA
CONSTRUCTIONS, BUT ON THE
COMPLEX CONSTRUCTION PERMITS,
IT IS STILL ON THE RICE.
A LOT OF THOSE PERMITS CAME IN
LIKE DIRECTOR CW 36.78.545 SAID
BECAUSE THEY WERE INVESTING
THROUGH THE FIRE CODE.
A LOT OF THOSE PROJECTS CAME IN
AT THE END OF 2020, AT THE
BEGINNING OF 2021.
OUR INTAKE WAS 6.2 BILLION LAST
YEAR AN HOUR ISSUANCE WAS ONLY
2.1, SO THERE'S A HUGE BACKUP
OF PERMIT APPLICATIONS IN THE
SYSTEM, MANY WHICH WILL STAY IN
THE SYSTEM ON APPLICANT'S CHOICE
, BUT WE'LL CONTINUE TO TRY TO
DO OUR PART AS QUICKLY AS
POSSIBLE.
>> JUST TO ADD TO THAT, FROM AN
SDCI REVENUE STANDPOINT , NOT
ALL, BUT THE BULK OF PERMIT
FEES FOR BUILDING PERMITS ARE
CODED AT APPLICATION AND NON-
ISSUANCE.
>> VICE CHAIR MOSQUEDA, DO YOU
FEEL YOUR QUESTIONS HAVE BEEN
ANSWERED? AFTER YOU MAKE YOUR
COMMENTS, I HAVE A COUPLE
QUESTIONS.
>> I THINK THE KEY TAKE AWAY
THAT YOU ENDED WITH, DIRECTOR
TORGELSON, IS AN IMPORTANT WANT
TO UNDERSCORE BECAUSE IT IS
NOT, I THINK, OUR INTENT TO BE
CONSISTENT WITH THE REVIEW
TIMES, RIGHT?
WE WANT TO MAKE SURE WE'RE
ACTUALLY IMPROVING AND NOT JUST
ADMITTING IN TERMS OF OUR
REVIEW TIMES.
>> CORRECT.
>> IT IS A HARD SKILL TO LOOK
AT HERE, BUT THERE IS A SLIGHT
UPTAKE STILL IN THE DELAY TIME.
HEUER PERMITS ARE BEING
SUBMITTED IN 2020, BUT THE
DELAYED TIME IS STILL VERY
CONCERNING, SO I GUESS THE
BIGGEST QUESTION I WAS TRYING
TO GET AT EARLIER IS WHAT IS
DIFFERENT IN THIS QUARTERLY
UPDATE VERSUS LAST QUARTERLY
UPDATE, AND HOW ARE WE TRYING
TO IDENTIFY NEW IDEAS TO
EXPEDITE PERMIT THAT ARE IN THE
PIPELINE, GIVEN HIGH COST OF
MATERIALS, COST OF LABOR, AND
THE NEED FOR US TO OPEN UP VERY
QUICKLY, RIGHT?
THIS IS LIKE UNPRECEDENTED
TIMES, AND WE'VE DONE A LOT IN
THE LAST YEAR TO TRY TO MAKE
SURE BUSINESSES CAN STAY
AFLOAT, AND I FEEL LIKE WE NEED
TO APPLY THAT SAME MENTALITY
WITH OUR APPLICATIONS AND
REVIEW THE TIMELINE HERE AND BE
VERY FLEXIBLE IN HOW WE'RE
HELPING FOLKS REOPEN.
>> ONE THING AND TEST THIS IS
ANDY AGAIN.
ONE THING I CAN ADD IS IN 2020,
BECAUSE OF THE HIRING FREEZES
THAT WENT INTO EFFECT AND THE
FACT WE HAD TERM LIMITED
POSITIONS THAT WERE ENDING AT
2020 AND THE BUILDING PLAN'S
CLASSIFICATION, WE WERE UNABLE
TO PROACTIVELY ADD BACK FLOWS
FROM ATTRITION AND RETIREMENTS
DURING 2020.
WE INITIATED A HIRING PROCESS
AT THE BEGINNING OF 2021 AFTER
THE 2021 BUDGET WAS PUT INTO
PLACE.
THAT CONVERTED ALL OF OUR
BUILDING PLANS TO REGULAR
ONGOING FUNDED, AND WE JUST
BROUGHT ON BOARD EIGHT NEW
BUILDING PLANS EXAMINERS IN THE
LAST TWO WEEKS, SO WE UNDERSTAND
WE PREDICTED SIX MONTHS AGO
THAT WE WOULD BE BEHIND DUE TO
THE VESTING RUSH AND THE FACT
THAT WE ARE HAVING CHALLENGES
STAFFING BECAUSE OF THOSE
CONSTRAINTS, BUT NOW, WE HAVE
PUT THAT IN PLACE, SO WE
ANTICIPATE THINGS ARE GOING TO
PICK UP SIGNIFICANTLY IN THE
NEXT THREE TO SIX MONTHS AS
THEY GET TRAINED UP AND ONBOARD
AS WELL AS WE PUT IN LACE SOME
OPPORTUNITIES FOR FACILITATING
AND EXPEDITING SMALL BUSINESS
APPLICATIONS, AND DIRECTOR
TORGELSON, YOU MAY WANT TO TALK
MORE ABOUT THAT ASPECT.
>> HAPPY TO DO THAT.
SHOULD I GO AHEAD AND DO THAT
NOW?
>> SHARE.
AND THEN I WILL ASK MY
QUESTIONS AFTERWARDS.
I WANT TO MAKE SURE VICE CHAIR
IS QUESTIONS ARE ANSWERED.
>> SO, SDCI WILL BE IN THE
PROCESS OF HIRING A PERMANENT
LIAISON, WHICH WILL FOCUS ON
THE VACANT STOREFRONT SPACES
DOWNTOWN. IT WILL ALSO FOCUS ON
SMALL BUSINESSES THROUGHOUT THE
CITY BEFORE THE PANDEMIC, THE
MAYOR PUT UP A SMALL BUSINESS
TASK FORCE, AND ALSO LOOK AT
OUR ARTS AND CULTURAL
BUSINESSES THAT HAVE REALLY
SUFFERED DURING THE PANDEMIC.
THIS WILL BE A CENTRAL POINT OF
CONTACT WITHIN OUR DEPARTMENT
WILL HELP FACILITATE THE PERMIT
REVIEW FOR THOSE SPECIAL TYPES
OF PERMITS.
THAT IS ONE IMMEDIATE
IMPROVEMENT THAT WE'RE IN THE
PROCESS OF MAKING.
SOMEONE TO REALLY HANDHOLD THAT
APPLICANT AND TO HELP THEM
UNDERSTAND WHAT PERMIT
PERFORMANCE ARE.
THE LAST THING WE WANT TO DO IS
HAVE A SMALL BUSINESS OWNER
COME IN AND SIGN THAT LEASE,
AND DISCOVER WHAT THE ACTUAL
REQUIREMENTS ARE.
>> THANK YOU.
THANK YOU AGAIN FOR OFFERING
ADDITIONAL TIME HERE.
I APPRECIATE THE NOTE ABOUT THE
HIRING FREEZE QUESTION.
I THINK THAT'S WHY THE COUNCIL
WORKS SO HARD TO MAKE SURE WE
AREN'T EXACTLY ENGAGING IN
AUSTERITY BUDGETING, WHICH I
ASSUME IS PART OF THE REASON
YOU SEE AN UPTICK IN THE
POSTRECESSION TIME, WHEN THE
RECESSION HIT WASHINGTON STATE
IN 2010 AND '11.
I APPRECIATE THAT IT HAS ALSO
BEEN SIX, SEVEN MONTHS SINCE
THE COUNCIL DID PASS THE 2021
BUDGET.
APPRECIATE THE HIRING THAT YOU
HAVE DONE HAS TAKEN PLACE.
BUT DIRECTOR TORGELSON, I'M
CONCERNED I'M NOT HEARING
SPECIFIC TARGETS.
I APPRECIATE THE HANDHOLDING
LIAISON PERSONNEL , BUT I THINK
WHAT I AM ASKING IS IF THE
EXPERIENCE OF THE SMALL
BUSINESSES THAT I'M HEARING IS
A SIX-MONTH PROCESS, IF THE
DATA CONTINUES TO SHOW THE
AVERAGE NUMBER OF DAYS WITHIN
AN SDCI BE RELATIVELY HIGH
RIGHT NOW, WE HAVE SPECIFIC
TARGETS WHERE WE'RE GOING TO
SAY, "LOOK IN THIS POST
PANDEMIC WORLD AS WE ARE
REOPENING IN THE NEXT 12
MONTHS, THE NEXT 6 MONTHS, OUR
COMMITMENT IS GOING TO BE THAT
WE GET PEOPLE THROUGH THE
PROCESS IN TWO MONTHS OF A
CERTAIN AMOUNT OF DAYS IS
REASONABLE FOR THE SMALL
BUSINESS BECAUSE SIX MONTHS IS
NOT."
I'M NOT HEARING A SPECIFIC
TIMELINE THAT YOU ARE
RESPONDING TO THE NEED FOR
FLEXIBILITY.
>> VICE CHAIR, I WILL JUMP IN
HERE TO KIND OF SHARE WHAT MY
NEXT STEPS -- BECAUSE THIS
SLIDE REALLY ILLUSTRATES THE
NEED FOR US TO REASSESS OUR
GOALS FOR HAVING PERMITS OUT
THE DOOR.
I BELIEVE, DIRECTOR TORGELSON,
CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG.
THE CURRENT BENCHMARK IS 120
DAYS, WHICH I BELIEVE TO BE
TOO LONG, AND FOR US TO
READJUST THAT GOAL MEANS WE
NEED TO COME AROUND A TABLE AND
EVERYONE PARTICIPATE IN
CHANGING THAT GOAL, SO BETWEEN
NOW AND THE NEXT PERMITTING
REPORT THAT WE WILL RECEIVE,
MR. AN IN MY OFFICE, WE WOULD
LOVE TO INCLUDE YOU AS A
PARTNER FOR VICE CHAIR TO HAVE
A ROUND TABLE DISCUSSION, THEN
A LUNCH AND LEARN TO PRESENT
MORE INFORMATION ABOUT
PERMITTING GOALS AND TURNAROUND
TIMES. THE REASON I WOULD LIKE
TO HAVE THIS SERIES OF MEETINGS
BETWEEN NOW AND THE NEXT
PERMITTING REPORT IS BECAUSE,
AS I STATED IN SLIDE SIX, WITH
ALL THE DIFFERENT NOTES, WE
NEED TO ENSURE THE CORRECT
STAFFING IS AVAILABLE ON EACH
TEAM TO ENSURE THAT THERE IS NOT
A ROVING BACKLOG WITHIN EACH OF
THOSE NOTES. DIRECTOR
TORGELSON, WOULD YOU LIKE TO
ADDRESS THAT?
>> WE LOOK FORWARD TO THAT RUN
TABLE, COUNCILMEMBER STRAUSS,
AND GETTING DIFFERENT PERMIT
APPLICANTS AT THE TABLE TO
DISCUSS IF WE NEED TO CHANGE
THOSE PERMITS.
>> THIS IS ANDY HIGGINS.
I WOULD ADD ALSO WE DO HAVE
CURRENT GOALS FOR INITIAL PLAN
REVIEW FOR THE PROJECT.
IT IS 95% COMPLETION WITHIN TWO
TO FOUR WEEKS, AND FOR THE
COMPLEX PROJECT, IT'S 95%
COMPLETION WITHIN 8 TO 12 WEEKS
, BUT THOSE WERE SENT A LONG
TIME AGO, AND A 120 DAY CLOCK
HAS BEEN SET, AND THOSE ARE
GOALS WE'RE STRIVING FOR.
WE ARE NOT RIGHT NOW MEETING
THAT GOAL, SO THE FIRST INTENT
IS FOR US TO GET BACK INTO A
PARADIGM WHERE WE CAN BE
MEETING THOSE GOALS, AND THE
STAFFING INFLUX IS GOING TO
HELP SIGNIFICANTLY.
IF YOU ARE RIGHT, THE GOALS ARE
TO BE SIGNIFICANTLY INCREASED,
IT'S REALLY A CAPACITY
QUESTION, AND I WOULD LIKE TO
ENGAGE IN THE CONVERSATION.
>> NOW, WE GET INTO SOME OF MY
DETAILED PROBLEMS ON THIS
SLIDE.
THANK YOU, ANTI-. THAT WAS A
HELPFUL EXPLANATION.
WHAT I AM LOOKING AT THIS
SLIDE, I SEE AVERAGE OF DAYS
WITHIN SDCI IN BLUE, AN AVERAGE
OF DAYS ELSEWHERE IN ORANGE
WITH THE PERCENTAGE OF TIME IN
SDCI AS THE BLACK LINE . CAN
YOU HELP ME UNDERSTAND WHO IS
HOLDING THE PERMIT WHEN IT IS
AVERAGE DAYS ELSEWHERE?
IS THAT OTHER CITY DEPARTMENTS
OR THE PERMIT HOLDER
THEMSELVES?
>> WOULD BE THE PERMIT HOLDER
THEMSELVES.
WE USE A STOPPED CLOCK TIME
SIMILAR TO A CHESS MATCH, WHERE
WE START THE CLOCK AT THE
OBLIGATION DATE, AND WHEN ALL
REQUIRED REVIEWS ARE COMPLETED,
WE STOP THE CLOCK AND CHECK IT
OUT TO THE APPLICANT, AND WHEN
THE APPLICANT RESPONDS AND
UPLOADS THE CORRECTION
RESPONSES, WE START THE CLOCK
AGAIN.
WE SENT IT BACK TO ALL THE
REQUIRED LOCATIONS THAT DID NOT
APPROVE THERE REVIEWS AND HAD
OUTSTANDING CORRECTIONS, WE GO
THROUGH THAT PROCESS, STOP THE
CLOCK AGAIN WHEN THEY ARE
COMPLETE, AND CHECK IT BACK OUT
TO THE APPLICANT FOR ANOTHER
ROUND, AND THAT GOES ON AND ON
UNTIL THE APPLICANT IMPROVE
THEIR PLANT SETS.
WE STOPPED THE CLOCK AGAIN, AND
WHENEVER THEY PAY FOR IT, THEY
AUTOMATICALLY CAN PULL UP THE
PERMIT NOW IN OUR SYSTEM.
IT'S A MATTER OF ALL CITY
DEPARTMENTS AND OWNERSHIP OF IT
IS IN THE CITY'S HANDS VERSUS
WHEN WE CHECK IT OUT TO AN
APPLICANT FOR RESPONSES BEING
IN THEIR HANDS.
>> I SEE DARLENE CAME OFF MUTE.
DARLENE, WOULD YOU LIKE TO ADD
ANYTHING?
>> I WAS KIND OF WAITING FOR
THE NEXT SLIDE, WHICH IS VERY
SIMILAR TO THIS ONE.
I DON'T KNOW IF YOU WANT TO GO
TO THE NEXT ONE.
BUT AM JUST
>> I'VE GOT A COUPLE MORE
THOUGHTS ON THIS SLIDE WHICH IS
SIMILAR TO THE NEXT ONE, THEN
PLEASE JOIN.
ANDY, I GUESS THE QUESTION HERE
IS WHERE IN THIS CHART IS IT
HIGHLIGHTED DAYS IN OTHER
DEPARTMENTS?
IS THAT JUST INCLUDED HERE IN
THE BLUE OF AVERAGE DAYS WITH
AN SDCI?
>> IT IS INCLUDED IN THE BLUE .
>> SO THE BLUE IS ALL CITY
DEPARTMENTS, AND THE ORANGES
APPLICANTS?
>> CORRECT.
TO YOUR POINT, THAT'S AN
INDICATOR WE ONLY HAVE CONTROL
OVER WHAT WE HAVE CONTROL OVER,
AND IF ANOTHER CITY DEPARTMENT
ENDS UP BEING UNDERSTAFFED AND
BECOME THE BOTTLENECK REVIEW
LOCATION, THAT CITY DEPARTMENT
ENDS UP BEING THE DEPARTMENT
THAT CONTROLS THAT CYCLE.
WE ONLY HAVE THE ABILITY TO
DEAL WITH THE SDCI PARTICULARS
AND DON'T REALLY HAVE THE
AUTHORITY TO TELL THE
DEPARTMENTS WHAT TO DO.
>> GREAT.
AT THIS TIME, AGAIN I HAVE TO
RAISE UP THE LEADERSHIP OF VICE
CHAIR AND COUNCILMEMBER
MOSQUEDA BECAUSE IF IT WERE NOT
FOR THE JUMPSTART POLICY, WE
WOULD BE IN A WORLD OF HURT IN
THIS SPACE.
THE BLACK LINE WITH THE PEAK
JUST AFTER 2008 IDENTIFIES THAT
IN THE LAST RECESSION, RATHER
THAN PASSING PROGRESSIVE
REVENUE, WE DECIDED TO LAY OFF
CITY STAFF, AND WHAT THAT DID
WAS, ESPECIALLY WITHIN THE
PERMIT WORLD, THESE ARE HIGHLY
SPECIFIC AND TRAINED
INDIVIDUALS FOR THEIR ROLES,
AND SO TO REHIRE FOR THOSE
POSITIONS CREATED A BACKLOG,
WHICH INCREASED AND CREATED
SOME OF THE DELAYS THAT I
BELIEVE WE'RE EXPERIENCING
TODAY.
SO, HERE WE ARE 13 YEARS AFTER
THE LAST RECESSION, STILL
EXPERIENCING SOME DELAYS THAT
WERE CAUSED BY LAYING OFF STAFF
RATHER THAN RETAINING STAFF
THROUGH A RECESSION, SO
YESTERDAY, THE MAYOR SIGNED THE
SEATTLE RESCUE PLAN THAT BUDGET
CHAIR MOSQUEDA AND COUNCIL
PRESIDENT CHAMPIONS THROUGH.
HIGHLIGHTING WHAT I SAID
YESTERDAY, WE WOULD NOT BE ABLE
TO BE GIVING MONEY TO COMMUNITY
AND SMALL BUSINESSES AND
CHILDCARE PROVIDERS IF WE WERE
BACKFILLING OFF OUR OWN CITY
BUDGET, SO AGAIN, CHEERS TO YOU,
COUNCIL MEMBER MOSQUEDA, FOR
MAKING SURE THAT WE DID NOT
REPEAT 2008.
>> AGAIN, A FEW YEARS AGO, BIG
THANK YOU TO THE COUNCIL FOR
PASSING SDCI'S REVISED FEE
ORDINANCE, SO WHEN WE DO HAVE
THAT NEXT RECESSION, WE WILL
NOT HAVE TO LAY OFF NEARLY AS
LARGE A PERCENTAGE OF STAFF AS
WE DID BACK DURING THE LAST
RECESSION, WHICH WILL HELP US
TREMENDOUSLY.
>> VICE CHAIR MOSQUEDA?
>> THANK YOU.
I KNOW THERE IS OTHER SLIDES TO
GET THROUGH.
MR. CHAIR, THANKS FOR THE
CONCEPT OF PULLING FOLKS
TOGETHER ON HOW TO EXPEDITE
TIMELINES.
I THINK ONE THING THAT WOULD BE
REALLY HELPFUL IN THIS POST
RECESSION AND THAT I WAS GOING
TO SAY POST-PANDEMIC.
WE ARE NOT DUE TO PANDEMIC YET.
IN THE WAKE OF THE LAST YEAR,
WE SHOULD BE LOOKING AT WHAT
OTHER CITIES MIGHT BE DOING TO
EXPEDITE PERMITS AS WELL.
I KNOW THAT SOME PLACES LIKE
AUSTIN HAD SOME INNOVATIVE
IDEAS, AND WE WERE LOOKING AT
THEM A FEW YEARS AGO ON HOW TO
BASICALLY EXPEDITE CERTAIN
TYPES OF PERMITS, ESPECIALLY FOR
PROJECTS WHICH INCLUDE HOUSING
AND CERTAIN PROJECT THAT
INCLUDED A HIGH LABOR STANDARD
AND HIGH PERCENTAGESOF
UNIONIZED LABOR FOR EXAMPLE,
AND PROJECTS HAVING A PAY FOR
SYSTEM THAT ALLOWS FOR FOLKS TO
HELP ADDRESS THE RESOURCE ISSUE
, SO I WOULD BE INTERESTED IN
GETTING FEEDBACK ON WHAT THOSE
OTHER CITIES HAVE DONE AND IF
WE NEED TO BE DOING THAT NOW I
DON'T WANT THAT TO DELAY THE
CONVERSATION.
LET'S NOT HAVE PARALYSIS BY
ANALYSIS HERE LET'S FIGURE OUT
WHAT WE NEED TO DO TO EXPEDITE
THESE PROCESSES TO GET
CONSTRUCTION UNDERWAY SO WE CAN
REBOUND.
WE KNOW OFTEN WITH THE
TIMELINE, THE FIGURES DON'T
INCLUDE THE EARLY DESIGN
GUIDANCE PHASE BECAUSE THAT
OCCURS BOTH FOR AND PRIOR TO
THE MONTH OF APPLICATION.
YOU HAVE ANY IDEAS TO FOCUS ON
DESIGN REVIEW, WHICH ACCOUNTS
FOR A HUGE PIECE OF THE
ENTITLEMENT PROCESS, AND ANY
OTHER TAKEAWAYS TO MAKE SURE
THAT WE ARE NOT JUST SORT OF
STRIVING FOR STAGNATION IN OUR
REVIEW TIMELINE, BUT ACTUALLY
EXPEDITING THE PROCESS ACROSS
THE BOARD, RECOGNIZING YOU
CAN'T CONTROL THE AVERAGE
NUMBER OF DAYS ELSEWHERE, JUST
FOCUSING ON THE AVERAGE NUMBER
OF DAYS WITHIN SDCI I THINK IS
THE INTENT OF THE CONVERSATION.
>> THAT'S EXACTLY SPOT ON, VICE
CHAIR MOSQUEDA.
ACTUALLY, SOME RESEARCH THAT
HAS ALREADY BEEN DONE
ESPECIALLY ON THE AUSTIN
PERMITTING PROCESS.
AND WE HAVE BENEFITED THAT KETO
FREEMAN HAS WORKED WITH AUSTIN
AS WELL.
I THINK THOSE CONVERSATIONS
SHOULD BE HELD IN 10 . SHOULD
WE MOVE ON SINCE CHAIR STRAUSS
ALREADY DISCUSSED ORDINANCES?
AND DIRECTOR TORGELSON AND
DARLENE, WOULD YOU LIKE TO
ADDRESS?
>> THIS SLIDE IS PRETTY MUCH
THE LAND-USE VERSION OF THE
SLIDE PREVIOUS THAT ANDY TALKED
ABOUT.
AS FAR AS THE TRENDS, SEEING
THE LIGHTS IN THE AMOUNT OF
TIMES THE DEPARTMENT IN
APPLICANT, SAME THING STANDS
EVERYTHING THAT HE HAD
MENTIONED I'VE BELIEVE PERTAINS
TO MASTER USE PERMITS AS WELL.
YOU WILL NOTICE ON THE FUTURE
SLIDES FOR MASTER USE PERMITS,
THE WAY WE DIVVIED UP THE TYPES
OF PROJECTS, THE COMPLEX
PROJECTS, THE DESIGN REVIEW
PROJECTS, THE SEPA PROJECTS,
AND PRETTY MUCH THE SIMPLE
MEDIUM PROJECTS ARE EVERYTHING
ELSE.
I THINK AS FAR AS COUNCILMEMBER
MOSQUEDA, YOUR QUESTION ABOUT
IT PRIOR TO THE ACTUAL
APPLICATION PROCESS, I KNOW MY
MANAGERS WHO MANAGE THE
SECTIONS AND DO THE LAND-USE
REVIEWS AND DESIGN REVIEWS, WE
KNOW THAT REDUCE AND PERMIT
TIMES AS ONE OF OUR GOALS
COMING UP IN RECOGNIZING THAT
AND SITTING DOWN AND
RECOGNIZING WHAT CAN WE DO.
FIRM UPS IS A LITTLE BIT
DIFFERENT FROM CONSTRUCTION AND
THAT THERE IS PROCESSES THAT WE
CAN'T ALTER, LIKE THE PUBLIC
NOTICE TIME, THE APPEAL TIME,
THAT SORT OF THING, BUT
WHATEVER WE DO HAVE CONTROL OF,
WHICH WOULD BE THE ACTUAL
REVIEW TIMES, AND MAYBE WHEN
THINGS GET SCHEDULED.
THAT IS WHAT WE ARE CONSIDERING
SITTING DOWN WHERE WE CAN
REDUCE ANYTHING.
>> ONE OF THE CHALLENGES THAT WE
, FRANKLY, HAVE HAD WITH DESIGN
REVIEW THAT IS NOT AS MUCH OF A
CHALLENGE TODAY IS THAT WE HAVE
, WHAT, SEVEN DESIGN REVIEW
BOARDS, AND WE HAD SO MANY
PROJECTS GOING.
DESIGN REVIEW, AND THE BOARDS
MEET SO MANY TIMES A MONTH,
THAT'S THE AMOUNT OF TIME THEY
HAD TO REVIEW THE PROJECTS,
PROJECTS WOULD GET SHIFTED INTO
THE MONTHS AHEAD, WHERE AS NOW,
I BELIEVE WITH ALMOST ALL OF
OUR DESIGN REVIEW BOARDS,
PROJECTS ARE ABLE TO GO TO THE
BOARD WHEN THEY'RE READY PRETTY
MUCH IMMEDIATELY, JUST BECAUSE
THERE ARE FEWER PROJECTS, SO IN
SOME WAYS, THAT IS NOT GOOD
NEWS.
IF THERE WERE FEWER COMING IN,
BUT THOSE PROJECTS ARE ABLE TO
GET TO THE BOARD MUCH FASTER.
THAT IS ANOTHER ISSUE WE HAVE
TO LOOK AT IT I THINK WE ALSO
HAVE TO TAKE A LOOK AT THE
THRESHOLD.
DO WE NEED TO CHANGE OR REVIEW
THRESHOLDS?
>> VICE CHAIR, DOES THAT ANSWER
YOUR QUESTIONS?
>> I HAVE ALL SORTS OF
QUESTIONS HOW WE CAN BYPASS
SOME OF THE PROCESS AND CREATE
PATHWAYS, ESPECIALLY GIVEN THE
EMERGENCY DECLARATIONS THAT
HAPPEN PUT OFF THAT HAD ALLOWED
US TO DO THAT AND MANY OTHER
AREAS, AND SOMETHING THAT YOU
ARE CONSIDERING AS WELL, MR.
CHAIR, AND DIRECTOR TORGELSON.
WE THINK OF THE PERMITTING
PROCESS THAT WILL ALLOW FOR
ADDITIONAL HOUSING.
IS THERE A SHORTER TIMELINE FOR
THE NOTICE, AND IS THERE A
SHORTER TIMELINE, OR COULD WE
JUST BYPASS THE DESIGN REVIEW
REQUIREMENTS, GIVEN THE URGENCY
OF RESTARTING THE ECONOMY AND
MORE IMPORTANTLY, HOUSING
FOLKS.
>> RIGHT NOW, DURING THE COVID
EMERGENCY, AFFORDABLE HOUSING
PROJECTS ARE NOT GOING THROUGH
DESIGN REVIEW.
>> I JUST MEAN HOUSING AS WELL.
>> HOUSING IN GENERAL, YEAH.
>> YEAH.
MORE TO COME, I SUPPOSE, BUT
OBVIOUSLY, A BIG CONCERN. WE
DID A LITTLE BIT OF WORK, AS
YOU NOTED, TO SHORTEN SOME OF
THOSE TIMELINES AND OTHER AREAS
IN PREVIOUS YEARS, BUT MAYBE
THAT ALSO NEEDS TO BE REVIEWED.
>> YES.
I WILL SAY YES TO THAT. THANK
YOU, VICE CHAIR.
>> SO, THIS IS ANDY HIGGINS
AGAIN.
THIS CHART IS BASICALLY
SHOWING A YEAR AND A HALF OR SO
OF HISTORY AND WHAT DAYS FROM
PERMIT APPLICATION AND ISSUANCE
TIMELINES HAVE BEEN, AND IT IS
SHOWING EVEN THROUGH THE MARCH
AND POST GO HOME, WORK FROM
HOME WORLD INDICATED THAT THIS
IS REALLY A STATE RELATIVELY
FLAT.
WHAT WE THAT EVEN WITH OUR
INITIAL PLAN REVIEW TIMELINES,
AS WE BROUGHT ON NEW STAFF, WE
ACTUALLY HAD THEM TAKING ON
CORRECTIONS CYCLE REVIEWS, SO
WE'RE NOT RELYING ON THEM TO DO
THE ENTIRE INITIAL REVIEW, BUT
THEY ARE LEARNING BY TAKING ON
THE CORRECTION REVIEWS THAT
SOMEONE ELSE HAD BEEN WORKING
WITH THAT REVIEWER TO MAKE SURE
ALL THE ISSUES HAVE BEEN IRONED
OUT, SO WE ARE RAMPING PEOPLE
UP TO SPEED.
THIS IS BASICALLY SAYING THE
TYPE OUR HAND HAS BEEN
RELATIVELY FLAT, AND THE TIME
IN THE APPLICANT'S HANDS HAS IN
SOME WAY BEEN INCREASING
BECAUSE A LOT OF THOSE PROJECTS
HAVE BEEN MARINATING,
ESPECIALLY THE LARGER PROJECT
THAT HAVE FUNDING ISSUES. YOU
ARE RIGHT.
THERE ARE OTHER ISSUES OUTSIDE
OF OUR CONTROL FROM A LENDING
PERSPECTIVE THAT ARE CAUSING
OTHER PROJECTS TO SIT IN THE
SYSTEM AND NOT WANT TO GET
ISSUED BECAUSE ONCE THEY GET
ISSUED, THEY'VE GOT AN 18 MONTH
WINDOW THAT THE PERMIT IS GOOD,
AND IF THEY DON'T START TO WORK
WITHIN THAT WINDOW, THEY ARE
SUBJECT TO COMPLIANCE. THERE
ARE OTHER FACTORS THAT GO INTO
THAT, BUT RELATIVELY OVER THE
LAST YEAR, THINGS HAVE BEEN
CONSISTENT.
SAME THING WITH CORRECTION
CYCLES HERE THE TOP CHART
INDICATES ON THE RIGHT THAT IT
TAKES ROUGHLY THREE OR SO
CORRECTION CYCLES TOGETHER ON
AVERAGE ON CIVIL AND MEDIUM
CONSTRUCTION PERMITS, AND FOR
COMPLEX, IT IS CLOSER TO FOUR,
AND THE GOAL IS TO TRY TO
REDUCE THAT SO THERE'S BETTER
CLARITY, BETTER COLLABORATION
ON SOLUTIONS , AND AN ABILITY
TO REDUCE CORRECTION CYCLES .
WE FEEL THAT THE COMBINATON OF
REDUCING OUR INITIAL PLAN
REVIEW AND BEING ABLE TO MEET
OUR CURRENT TARGETS IN THE
FIRST PLACE, AS WELL AS BEING
ABLE TO REDUCE THE NUMBER OF
CORRECTION CYCLES NEEDED WILL A
COUPLE WHAT YOU ARE TRYING TO
ACCOMPLISH.
I HAVE ONE OTHER KNOW.
SORRY TO INTERRUPT. THERE WAS A
COMMENT ON THE PREVIOUS COUPLE
OF SLIDES ABOUT PAYING FOR
EXPEDITING.
WE DID RUN A RACIAL EQUITY
TOOLKIT AGAINST THAT ABOUT 15
YEARS AGO AND DECIDED THAT IT
WAS REALLY NOT EQUITABLE TO
ALLOW PEOPLE THAT DID HAVE THE
RESOURCES TO PAY FOR EXPEDITING
TO ALLOW THEM TO GET THROUGH
THE SYSTEM FASTER THAN THOSE
THAT DID NOT HAVE THE ABILITY
TO PAY FOR EXPEDITING, SO WE'VE
MADE A POLICY CHOICE OVER MANY,
MANY YEARS TO NOT ALLOW THAT
FOR THAT EXACT REASON.
WE HAVE HAD AGREEMENTS WITH
PARTIES OUTSIDE THE CITY TO ADD
ADDITIONAL FUNDING FOR STAFFING
, AND I THINK THAT THAT HAS
HELPED IMPROVE THE THROUGHPUT
OF THE ENTIRE SYSTEM, WHICH I
BELIEVE IS A MORE EQUITABLE
SOLUTION, AND I BELIEVE ,
COUNCILMEMBER STRAUSS, THAT IS
WHAT YOUR INTENT MAY BE, TO
INCREASE OUR CAPACITY OVER ALL
AND OUR DEPTH OF CAPACITY TO
DEAL WITH THOSE CONSTRAINTS
THAT ARISE FROM TIME TO TIME
AND CAUSE BOTTLENECKS TO SHIFT
FROM ONE REVIEW LOCATION TO
ANOTHER SO THAT ALL REVIEW
LOCATIONS ARE ABLE TO REVIEW
EFFECTIVELY AND KEEP OUR
THROUGHPUT FLOW IN.
>> YES, VICE CHAIR.
PLEASE KEEP GOING, AND I'VE GOT
QUESTIONS ONCE YOU'RE DONE.
>> THANK YOU, ANDY.
FOR THE HISTORY ON THAT FROM 15
YEARS AGO.
I DID NOT KNOW WE WERE USING
RACIAL EQUITY TOOLS.
I THINK THE QUESTION I WOULD
STILL HAVE IS ARE THERE OTHER
CITIES USING SOME SORT OF PAY
FOR MODEL WITH AN EQUITY LENS
WITH A SOCIAL JUSTICE LENS, SO
IF THE PROJECT IS GOING TOWARDS
BUILDING HOUSING OR IF A
PROJECT USES A HIGH NUMBER OF
GOOD LIVING WAGE JOBS, IF IT IS
CREATING OR USING GREEN
BUILDING STANDARDS, OR
SOMETHING ALONG THOSE LINES TO
ACTUALLY GET ABBY UNDERLYING
RACIAL SOCIAL JUSTICE ISSUES
WE'RE TRYING TO ADDRESS DURING
THE CITY.
15 YEARS AGO, WE DID NOT HAVE
THE 20% INCREASE AND THE DECADE
SPAN IN OUR POPULATION.
WE WERE IN A DECLARED STATE OF
EMERGENCY, SO MAYBE THERE IS
SOMETHING'S HAPPENING NOW POST
COVID THAT CAN STILL HELP US
EXPEDITE, AND I ALSO DON'T
THINK IT IS A SIMPLE PAY FOR
MODEL THAT'S EQUITABLE, BUT IF
THERE IS THINGS WE CAN DO TO
HELP BRING IN ADDITIONAL STAFF
OR EXPLOIT CERTAIN TYPES OF
PROJECTS, THAT MIGHT BE HELPFUL
AS LONG AS IT IS NOT INCREASING
THE WEIGHT FOR OTHER PROJECTS
AS WELL. LOOKING FOR TO WORK
WITH YOU ON THAT, BUT I
APPRECIATE THE BACKGROUND, AND
I WANT TO THINK ABOUT IF
THERE'S A WAY WE CAN LOOK AT
THE TYPE OF PROJECTS,
ESPECIALLY GIVEN THE URGENCY
RIGHT NOW OF COVID AND SMALL
BUSINESSES REMAINING OPEN, ET
CETERA.
>> WE CAN SHARE OUR
PRIORITIZATION GUIDELINE IN
PLACE.
WE ALREADY PRIORITIZE
AFFORDABLE HOUSING PROJECTS AND
SCHOOL PROJECTS AND, YOU KNOW,
SHELTER PROJECTS AND THINGS
LIKE THAT THAT TO GET DIFFERENT
LEVELS OF PRIORITIZATION.
>> THAT WOULD BE HELPFUL.
I DO HAVE THAT BROKEN DOWN BY
THE TIME, LIKE PROJECT THAT
HAVE HOUSING, PROJECTS THAT ARE
FOR SMALL BUSINESSES?
COULD WE SEE THAT TYPE OF
DELINEATION?
>> YES.
>> OKAY.
>> WONDERFUL.
THANK YOU.
AND MY QUESTIONS HERE, I GUESS
THIS SLIDE WITH THE MASTER USE
PERMIT AND SIMPLE AND MEDIUM
PERMITS, BOTH SLIDES WORK WELL
FOR THE QUESTION I HAVE HERE.
JUST TO UNDERSTAND WHEN WE WERE
SPEAKING EARLIERABOUT GOALS
AND YOU WERE NOTING THAT FOR I
BELIEVE SIMPLE AND MEDIUM
PERMITS, THE GOAL FOR
TURNAROUND IS TWO TO FOUR
WEEKS, AND FOR COMPLEX, IT IS 8
TO 12 WEEKS?
>> 8 TO 12, CORRECT.
>> I AM STILL NOT EVEN USING MY
NOTES, TEACH.
>> GOOD JOB.
>> [ LAUGHTER ] SO, I THINK
WHAT IS IMPORTANT TO NOTE HERE
AND PART OF THE CONVERSATION
ABOUT REASSESSING GOALS IS THAT
THOSE GOALS ARE JUST FOR WHAT
ARE OFTENTIMES THE FIRST
CORRECTION CYCLE, AND THEN FOR
THE OVERALL GOAL OF HAVING THE
PERMIT PROCESS 120 DAYS IS TO
INCLUDE ALL CORRECTION CYCLES.
I THINK THAT IS SOMETHING THAT
CAN BE CONFUSING AND NEEDS TO
BE ADDRESSED. WHAT I DID HEAR
YOU SAY, AND LET ME MAKE SURE I
HEARD IT CORRECTLY, IS WITH THE
BLUE BEAM SOFTWARE NOW BEING
IMPLEMENTED, YOU'RE ABLE TO
MAKE REAL TIME AND THAT YOU'RE
ABLE TO GIVE REAL-TIME
FEEDBACK, RATHER THAN WAITING
FOR CORRECTION CYCLES. IS THAT
THE CASE, AND USING THAT WILL
REDUCE THE CORRECTION CYCLES?
>> IT HAS CAPABILITY TO DO
THAT.
YES.
THAT IS NOT PART OF OUR INITIAL
LIMITATION BECAUSE IT WOULD
ONLY BE APPLICABLE FOR A SMALL
SET OF PROJECTS WHERE IT WOULD
ADD VALUE.
IF WE TRIED TO DO A PRE-
RESUBMITTAL CONFERENCE ON EVERY
APPLICATION, THAT WOULD REALLY
BOG DOWN A LOT OF THE SYSTEM,
SO WHERE THERE IS REALLY
COMPLEX ISSUES OR LARGER
PROJECTS OR PROJECT THAT NEEDS
A LITTLE MORE HANDHOLDING TO
GET THROUGH SOME OF THE
CHALLENGING ISSUES THAT THEY
ARE FACED, WE DO HAVE THE
OPPORTUNITY TO POTENTIALLY DO
THAT AS PART OF THE BLUE BEAM
STUDIO PACKAGE, BUT INITIALLY
WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO IS
REALLY REPLICATE OR REPLACE
WHAT WE HAVE IN OUR FOCUSED
TOOL AND ENHANCE OUR
OPPORTUNITY TO COLLABORATE
WITHIN THAT SINGLE TOOL AND
ALLOW US TO TRY TO REDUCE
CORRECTION CYCLES VIA THAT
INITIALLY.
>> OKAY, GREAT.
JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE. AND
WHAT STRATEGIES -- AND MAYBE
THIS IS BETTER FOR THE ROUND
TABLE CONVERSATION.
DU AT THE TOP OF YOUR HEAD HAVE
MORE STRATEGIES THAT YOU CAN
IMPLEMENT DURING THESE
CORRECTION CYCLES?
>> I THINK OUR BIGGEST ONE IS
TRYING TO BE AS CLEAR AS
POSSIBLE ON WHAT ARE THE
REQUIRED CORRECTIONS AND HOW TO
COMPLY WITH THE CODE.
AT THE END OF THE DAY, OUR JOB
IS TO POINT OUT AREAS WHERE THE
APPLICATION ISN'T IN COMPLIANCE
OR SUBSTANTIAL COMPLIANCE WITH
THE CODE, AND IT'S INCUMBENT ON
THE APPLICANT TO SUBSTANTIALLY
APPLY TO THE CODE.
IF WE COULD GET COMPLAINTS
FASTER THROUGH A CYCLE, WE'LL
BE ABLE TO GET ISSUANCE FASTER
OVERALL. THAT IS THE KEY TO ME,
THAT THE CYCLING IS REALLY
PROBLEMATIC, AND THE AVERAGES
SOMETIMES DON'T SHOW THAT IN
THERE.
SOMETIMES, WE HAVE OTHER CHARTS
THAT SHOW ONE TO THREE CYCLES
AND YOU ARE VERY RESPONSIVE TO
YOUR APPLICATION CORRECTIONS,
YOU'RE GOING TO GET TO THE
PERMIT PROCESS IN A MUCH
SHORTER PERIOD OF TIME, WHETHER
IF IT TAKES YOU FOUR TO FIVE
CYCLES, AM I DOUBLE THAT TIME
NINE OR SIX CYCLE, IT MAY
TRIPLE THE TIMELINE. THE
AVERAGE IS ONE WAY TO LOOK AT
IT, BUT THERE'S A LARGE NUMBER
OF OUR PROJECTS THAT DO GO
THROUGH IN ONE TO THREE CYCLES
AND GET ISSUES MUCH, MUCH MORE
QUICKLY VERSUS THE ONES THAT
TAKE FOUR TO FIVE TO SIX CYCLES
OR MORE WHO ARE EITHER [
LAUGHTER ] I DON'T HOW TO
EXPLAIN WHY YOU TAKE THAT
SOMETIMES.
SOMETIMES IT'S CHALLENGING
ISSUES, SOMETIMES LACK OF
RESPONSIVENESS FROM THE
APPLICANT'S. SOMETIMES IT IS
JUST A CHALLENGE TO THE
QUESTION BEING ASKED, SO THAT
IS WHERE WE WANT TO FOCUS ON.
FINDING SOLUTIONS, AND GETTING
THROUGH THOSE FASTER, AND
GETTING TO ISSUANCE QUICKLY.
>> THANK YOU.
THOSE ARE ALL MY QUESTIONS FOR
THIS SLIDE.
>> SO THIS SLIDE IS REALLY
INDICATIVE OF THAT INITIAL PLAN
REVIEW.
TARGET TIMELINE, THIS SHOWS HIM
A TIMELINE OF ABOUT THE
BEGINNING OF 2019 AFTER WE WENT
LIVE WITH THE SELLER, THE
AVAILABILITY TO MEET WITH OUR
INITIAL TIMELINE TARGETS AT THE
95% LEVEL.
YOU CAN SEE AS WE GOT INTO 2020
IN THE MIDDLE OF THIS CHART
THROUGH ABOUT JULY 2020, WE
ACTUALLY WERE ABLE TO GET UP
THERE AND ACHIEVE THOSE TARGETS
FAIRLY CONSISTENTLY.
WE DID NOT REALLY HAVE A
REPORTING IN PLACE UNTIL ABOUT
THE MIDDLE OF 2019, SO YOU CAN
SEE FROM THE MIDDLE 2019 AND
BILL OF 2020, HAVING THAT
REPORTING IN PLACE AND BEING
ABLE TO HAVE THE STAFFING IN
PLACE TO GET THOSE REVIEWS
COMPLETED. WE WERE ABLE TO GET
UP THERE.
AS THE MIDDLE OF 2020 HIT AND
WE STARTED TO FEEL THE
ATTRITION FROM RETIREMENTS AND
WE WERE NOT ABLE TO BACKFILL
THE TERMINATED POSITIONS
BECAUSE IS GOING TO TAKE A SIX
MONTH TERM LIMITED IN A
PANDEMIC AS A JOB? YOU KNOW,
THAT HAS REALLY DROPPED OFF TO
TODAY, AND I THINK WE HAVE
GOTTEN AHEAD OF THAT TIERED WE
ARE BRINGING ON NEW AUDIENCE
REVIEWERS, AND WE'VE ONLY GOT
THEM ON BOARD AND IN PLACE
TRAINING THEM UP.
STARTING TODAY, WE'VE ACTUALLY
GOT TWO NEW GEOTECHNICAL
ENGINEERS THAT ARE STARTING, SO
THAT'S GOING TO ADD CAPACITY IN
THAT POTENTIAL BOTTLENECK
LOCATION, AND WE'RE ALSO
RECRUITING FOR TWO ADDITIONAL
AND A THIRD POSITION THAT WE
LOST THROUGH ATTRITION. THIS
IS, I FEEL LIKE POSSIBLY THE
WORST POINT UNFORTUNATELY
REPORTING OUT TODAY.
IT DOES NOT FEEL GOOD TO SAY
THAT, BUT I WILL SAY GOING
FORWARD, IT DOES LOOK BETTER IN
TERMS OF AS WE BRING ON
ADDITIONAL CAPACITY IN THE
CURRENT BOTTLENECK REVIEW
LOCATIONS.
THAT WILL BE IN A BETTER STATE
THREE TO SIX MONTHS FROM NOW.
>> THIS IS NATHAN TORGELSON .
THE FIRE DEPARTMENT BROUGHT ON
A NEW PLAN TO REVIEW AS WELL,
WHICH SHOULD HELP SIGNIFICANTLY
IN THAT AREA.
>> THANK YOU.
YOU ADDRESSED ON THAT LAST SLIDE
, YOU ADDRESSED MANY OF THE
ASPECTS TO MY QUESTION OF WHAT
CREATED THE SITUATIONS FOR US
NOT MEETING OUR GOALS.
IS THERE ANYTHING ELSE YOU
WOULD LIKE TO ADD?
IT SOUNDS LIKE STAFFING AND
TECHNOLOGY HAVE BEEN THE MAIN
DRIVERS.
IS THERE ANYTHING ELSE I NEED
TO KNOW?
OF GETTING ULTIMATELY, IT'S A
CAPACITY QUESTION AT THIS POINT
AND MAKING SURE ALL THE REVIEW
LOCATIONS HAVE ENOUGH CAPACITY
TO DEAL WITH THE DEMANDS THAT
ARE IN PLACE CURRENTLY.
THE VESTING RUSHES ANOTHER ONE
OF THOSE THINGS WHERE WE'RE
GETTING TOWARD THE TAIL END OF
WORKING THROUGH THOSE
APPLICATIONS I CAME IN, IN
MARCH, AND AS THE NUMBER OF
APPLICATIONS HAS SOFTENED SINCE
THAT TIME, I BELIEVE WE'LL ALSO
BE CATCHING UP JUST DUE TO THE
FACT THAT THE MAN IS GOING DOWN
AND CAPACITY IS GOING UP, SO
WHEN THAT HAPPENS, I BELIEVE
WE'RE GOING TO GET CLOSER AND
CLOSER TO OUR TARGET A FEW
TIMES.
>> THAT I ALSO HEAR YOU SAY THE
TIME OR THE TERM LIMITED
POSITIONS DID NOT PREVIOUSLY
BEEN CONVERTED TO PERMANENT
POSITIONS?
>> YES.
THANKFULLY, YOU ALL APPROVED
THE BUDGET FOR 2021, WHERE WE
ASKED TO HAVE THAT ALL
CONVERTED FROM TERM LIMITED
POSITIONS TO REGULAR, ONGOING
FUNDED POSITIONS FOR BUILDING
PLANS EXAMINERS.
I BELIEVE WE HAD FIVE OR SIX
POCKETS AND A SUPERVISOR POCKET
THAT WERE ALL TERM LIMITED
ENDING AT THE END OF 2020, AND
WE HAD HAD THOSE FOR A NUMBER
OF YEARS THAT WE INITIALLY
REQUESTED THROUGH THE BUDGET
AUTHORITY BACK IN 2016-ISH, I
THNK, SO I THINK IT'S REALLY
DIFFICULT TO RECRUIT WITH A
TERM LIMITED TAG ON IT WHEN YOU
PUT THAT RECRUITMENT OUT THERE
BECAUSE PEOPLE LOOK AT THAT
LIKE IT IS A TEMP JOB, SO IT IS
DIFFICULT RECRUIT FOR THOSE, SO
THE BETTER, THE MORE ABLE WE
ARE TO GET REGULARLY FUNDED
POSITIONS, KNOWING THAT NOTHING
IS PERMANENT.
LAYOFFS CAN HAPPEN IF REVENUE
GOES TO THE FLOOR AND, YOU
KNOW, EVERYONE IS AWARE OF
THAT, BUT JUST HAVING THAT TAG
OF TERM LIMIT MAKE IT VERY,
VERY DIFFICULT FOR AGREEMENTS.
BEING ABLE TO GO FORWARD, WE
WERE ABLE TO BRING ON A STRONG
GROUP OF FOLKS THE LAST FEW
MONTHS.
>> ANOTHER ASPECT OF BUDGET
CHAIR MOSQUEDA'S LEADERSHIP.
HELPING YOU OUT ALREADY.
MAYBE WE CAN TALK ABOUT THIS
DURING THE ROUND TABLE.
JUST FOR THE VIEWING PUBLIC,
WHAT YOU BELIEVE NEEDS TO
HAPPEN FOR US TO CHANGE THE
GOALS, SO WHETHER THAT IS THE
120-DAY GOAL, ORDER OR THE 4
AND 12-WEEK GOALS.
>> THAT IS A QUESTION OF WHAT
LOOKS GOOD, WHAT DOES GOOD LOOK
LIKE, AND DEFINING THAT FROM AN
APPLICANT'S PERSPECTIVE IN YOUR
PERSPECTIVE AND SAYING, YOU
KNOW, WHAT MAKES SENSE, AND
BEING ABLE TO HAVE ENOUGH
CAPACITY TO MEET THOSE GOALS
AND MEETING THEM IN EVERY
REVIEW LOCATION BECAUSE WHEN WE
BRING IN AN APPLICATION, IT'S
GOT TO GET TO EVERY SINGLE
REVIEW LOCATION BEFORE IT GETS
CHECKED OUT TO THE APPLICANT,
SO ANY PARTICULAR RELOCATION
THAT ENDS UP BECOMING THAT
BOTTLENECK END UP BECOMING THE
CHALLENGE, BUT AT SOME POINT,
YOU CAN ONLY ADD SO MUCH TOO,
AND IF THERE'S DIMINISHING
RETURN AND A HUGE RISK OF OVER
STAFFING AS WELL, IT'S ABOUT
TRYING TO FIND THAT BALANCE OF
WHAT IS GOOD LOOK LIKE AND WHAT
DOES IT TAKE TO GET THERE
CONSISTENTLY.
>> THANK YOU.
>> I THINK THIS IS JUST KIND OF
A REITERATION OF THE NUMBER OF
CYCLES AND WHAT MAY BE CAUSING
THE COMPLEXITY OF CODE
REGULATION, LOWER QUALITY
CEMENTED PLANS BECAUSE OF JUST
EVERYBODY BEING SO BUSY.
NEW CITY STAFF WHO TEND TO SORT
OF COVER THEIR OWN BUTTS WHEN
THEY START OUT INITIALLY,
WRITE MORE QUESTIONS THAN
NECESSARY BECAUSE THEY DON'T
WANT TO MISS SOMETHING . WE
TRAIN THEM OUT.
WE TRY TO GET THEM PAST THAT AS
SOON AS POSSIBLE AND NOT HAVE
THAT HAPPEN , BUT IT IS A
REALITY.
AND THEN, YOU KNOW, AS PROJECTS
COME BACK IN THE DOOR, WE HAVE
SHORTER TARGET TIMES FOR RE-
REVIEWING THIS PROJECT THAN THE
INITIAL REVIEW PERIODS
THEMSELVES, SO WE TRACKED
INITIAL PLAN REVIEW MOST
CLOSELY, AND THE TIMELINES
AROUND MEETING THOSE TARGETS,
BUT IT ALSO HAS AN IMPACT ON
CYCLE REVIEWS AS WELL AND HOW
LONG PROJECTS IN THE REVIEW PER
CYCLE CUES, ONCE THEY COME BACK
IN THE DOOR FOR CORRECTIONS.
LIKE I SAID, WE TRY TO GET
THOSE DONE AND OUT THE DOOR
FASTER, BUT WHEN A REVIEW
LOCATION BECOMES A BOTTLENECK,
THEY ONLY HAVE SO MUCH
CAPACITY.
IT IS NOT ONLY REDUCING INITIAL
PLAN REVIEW, BUT IT'S ALSO
REDUCING CORRECTION TIME AND
LOOKING AT THE WHOLE IN ORDER
TO REDUCE.
>> THANK YOU.
I THINK IN THE NEXT
PRESENTATION WE HAVE IN
SEPTEMBER, IT WILL BE REALLY
HELPFUL FOR ME TO UNDERSTAND
THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN OTHER
DEPARTMENTS IN SDCI'S ROLE
BECAUSE AS THE DEPARTMENT OF
CONSTRUCTION AND INSPECTIONS,
YOUR WHOLE JOB IS MAKING SURE
THAT WE GET THESE PERMITS OUT
THE DOOR, AND I KNOW YOU HAVE A
VERY INTENSE FOCUS ON THIS, SO
OTHER DEPARTMENTS DON'T HAVE
THAT SAME GOAL IN THEIR
DEPARTMENT TO ISSUE PERMITS, SO
I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT
WE'RE GIVING THEM THE RESOURCES
THAT THEY NEED TO BE SUCCESSFUL
AS WELL.
>> SO, THIS IS NATHAN.
LOOKING TO THE REST OF 2021 AND
INTO 2022, OBVIOUSLY OUR KEY
PRIORITY IS TO MAKE REDUCTIONS
IN OUR PERMITTING TIMES.
WE HAVE LEARNED A LOT THROUGH
CODED. WE KNOW THAT WE HAVE
BEEN ABLE TO WORK FAIRLY
SUCCESSFULLY VIRTUALLY.
ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE WANT
TO DO IS STAND UP A VIRTUAL
APPLICANT CENTER SO SOMEONE
DOES NOT HAVE TO COME DOWNTOWN.
THEY CAN GET ON A SCREEN LIKE
THIS AND TALK TO AN SDCI STAFF
PERSON IN OUR APPLICANT
SERVICE CENTER.
WE HAVE LOOKED AT THE
POSSIBILITY OF HAVING IN PRISON
SERVICES AT NON-DOWNTOWN
LOCATIONS IF IT IS REALLY
IMPORTANT FOR A PERSON TO HAVE
FACE-TO-FACE CONTACT WITH
SOMEONE . THAT CAN PERHAPS BE
AT A SEATTLE PUBLIC LIBRARY
BRANCH LOCATION.
AGAIN, WE WANT TO RESUME ALL
OUR STANDARD SERVICES. OUR
RENTAL REGISTRATION INSPECTION
ORDINANCE INSPECTIONS HAVE BEEN
ON PAUSE DURING CODED, AND WE
KNOW THAT WE WILL RESUME THOSE
SERVICES.
AND FINALLY, YOU KNOW, WE
TALKED ABOUT THE IMPORTANCE OF
REDUCING PERMITTED TIMES, BUT
WE ALSO CONTINUE TO WORK ON
IMPROVING OUR CUSTOMER
EXPERIENCE, AND PART OF THAT
COMES WITH TECHNOLOGY CHANGES
THAT AND HE TALKED ABOUT AND
ARE HIGHLIGHTED IN A SLIDE
COMING UP.
>> SO THIS SLIDE IS SHOWING
WHAT THE PROJECT VALUATIONS WERE
OVER THE COURSE OF 2019, 2020,
AND 2021 . YOU SAW SPIKE AND
DECEMBER OF 2020, THEN JANUARY
AND MARCH OF 2021.
EACH OF THOSE REALLY IS AROUND
WHAT WAS GOING TO BE THE CODE
ADOPTION DATE OF THE 2018
CONSTRUCTION CODES.
INITIALLY, IT WAS JULY 1st, SO
WE HAD A NUMBER OF PROJECTS
SHOOTING TO GET IN AT JUNE,
SINCE THEY WERE READY TO GO.
A LOT OF THEM CARRIED FORWARD
AND KEPT GOING WITH THOSE .
THEN THE DATE SHIFTED I BELIEVE
TO NOVEMBER, SO OCTOBER, WE SAW
IT WAS SOME THOUGHT AROUND END
OF YEAR, BUT IT LANDED WITH
MARCH 15th, AND THAT WAS A
LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT THAN THE
STATE CONVERSATION.
IN THAT WHOLE PERIOD OF TIME,
WE HAD A NUMBER OF PROJECT THAT
WE WERE GOING TO PLAY LATER IN
2021, RUSH IN, AND GET AHEAD OF
THOSE CHANGES.
SO WE HAVE SEEN A NUMBER OF
THOSE BUMPS IN VALUATION, BUT
YOU CAN ALSO SEE THAT THE
VOLUME HAS MAINTAINED A FAIRLY
CONSISTENT TIME IN MARCH OF
LAST YEAR.
OF COURSE, THERE WAS A DIP
PRIMARILY IN SMALLER PROJECTS.
THE VOLUME OF PROJECTS WE GET
THAT ARE IN SMALL TO MEDIUM IS
ROUGHLY 80% TO 85% OF OUR TOTAL
VOLUME, VERSUS ACCOMPLISHED
PROJECTS WHICH IS MORE OF THAT
15% TO 20%, BUT THEY ARE MUCH
HIGHER VALUE PROJECTS, SO YOU
CAN TELL AFTER THE PANDEMIC
HIT, THINGS SHUT DOWN, A LOT OF
THOSE SMALL PROJECTS HIT THE
BRAKES AND DID NOT PROCEED
RIGHT AWAY, BUT AS THINGS
STARTED TO REOPEN BACKUP IN THE
SUMMER, THOSE VOLUMES CAME BACK
UP.
THAT IS FAIRLY CONSISTENT, EVEN
THROUGH A RECESSION.
WE OFTEN NOTE OUR EVALUATION OF
PERMITS DROPS MUCH MORE
SIGNIFICANTLY THAN THE VOLUME
OF PERMITS IN THE 2008 RISK
ACTION, VALUATION DROPPED BY 50%
, WHICH IS WHY WE ENDED UP
EXPERIENCING SO MANY LAYOFFS AS
WE DID NOT HAVE A SIGNIFICANT
ENOUGH CORE STAFFING RESERVE IN
PLACE, WHICH WE DO NOW.
THE VOLUME OF PERMITS REMAINED
AT ABOUT AN 80% TICK.
SO EVEN THOUGH THE VOLUME STATE
HIGH AND THE VALUATION AND
REVENUE DECLINED SIGNIFICANTLY,
WE STILL HAVE A HIGH VALUE OF
PERMITS COMING IN THROUGH THE
SYSTEM, WHICH IS WHY WE NEED TO
MAINTAIN STAFFING AND, EVEN
DURING TOWN CONCERNS, SO WE'RE
ANTICIPATING ECONOMIC RECOVERY,
WE WANT TO BE ABLE TO HAVE
TRAINED STAFF FULLY EFFECTIVE
IN PLACE SO WE ARE HELPING TO
FACILITATE THAT ECONOMIC
úRECOVERY RATHER THAN BEING A
ROADBLOCK TO THAT, SO WE
DEFINITELY APPRECIATE THE
ABILITY NOW TO HAVE THAT CORE
STAFFING.
>> THANK YOU, AND YOU ACTUALLY
ANSWERED ALL THE QUESTIONS I
PREPARED.
JUST HIGHLIGHTING THE UPWARD
TICKS WHEN MANY PERMITS ARE
TRYING TO COME THROUGH,
DESPERATE FOR NEW CODE AND
LIMITATION.
AND IF THAT DOES NOT HAPPEN
WITH THE APPROPRIATE STAFF, CAN
YOU CREATE A WAVE OF DELAY.
THANK YOU, ANDY.
>> THIS IS DARLENE AGAIN.
SO THIS SLIDE PRETTY MUCH SHOWS
THE APPLICATION INTAKE FOR THE
LAST THREE YEARS, AND IT HAS
DEFINITELY SLOWED, SO IT IS
SUMMER, BUT IT HAS BEEN STEADY
SINCE OF SEPTEMBER LAST YEAR
TILL NOW, AND I JUST POINTED
OUT THAT JANUARY WAS PROBABLY
OUR LOWEST MONTH WITH 38
APPLICATIONS, THEN APRIL THIS
YEAR WAS OUR HIGHEST MONTH WITH
60.
HOW THIS IS DIFFERENT FROM THE
FLIGHT FOR CONSTRUCTION INTAKE?
WE DON'T HAVE VALUATION
INFORMATION BECAUSE WE DON'T
LOOK AT PROJECT VALUE AT
APPLICATION, SO THIS IS
STRICTLY APPLICATION NUMBERS.
I THINK SOMETHING I MENTIONED
BEFORE IS SOMETHING STEADY BUT
DOES NOT SHOW ON HERE.
WE ALWAYS HAVE A STEADY AMOUNT
OF OUTSIDE DIVISIONS COME IN,
AND THAT IS DUE PARTLY TO
WHENEVER WE ISSUE TOWNHOUSE
PERMITS OR ROADHOUSE PERMITS,
TYPICALLY IT COMES AFTER THAT.
THAT IS ONE OF OUR STEADY
STREAMS.
I WAS THINKING ABOUT THIS.
MAYBE WE CAN TALK ABOUT THIS
LATER.
I DON'T KNOW IF THIS SLIDE
COULD BE MORE HELPFUL OR
VALUABLE OR IF MAYBE IT SHOWED
THE COMPLEX AND SIMPLE AND
MEDIUM, JUST SO YOU CAN GET AN
IDEA OF THE SIZE OF THE PROJECTS
COMING IN BECAUSE THIS IS THE
APPLICATION. IF YOU THINK THAT
COULD BE VALUABLE, WE CAN HAVE
OUR ECONOMIST GOING.
>> THAT WILL BE AVAILABLE FOR
THE NEXT PRESENTATION.
WE CAN TURN BACK TODAY OR JULY.
>> THANK YOU.
>> THIS IS ALL THE TRADE
PERMITS.
AGAIN, THIS IS NATHAN, BOILER,
ELECTRICAL, SIDE PERMITS
WHATSOEVER.
YOU CAN SEE TRADE MINUTES HAVE
RETURNED TO PRE-PANDEMIC VOLUMES
, SO DEFINITELY BACK ON TRACK
THERE.
>> IN OUR PREMEETING BRIEFING,
I ASKED THE QUESTION, AND HE
DESCRIBED IT A LITTLE BIT. CAN
YOU EXPAND A LITTLE BIT ON WHAT
OUR TRADE PERMITS AS COMPARED
TO BUILDING PERMITS?
>> TRADE PERMITS AGAIN ARE
THINGS LIKE BOILER PRESSURE,
VALVE PERMITS, ELECTRICAL
PERMITS, SIGN AND AWNING
PERMITS, CONVEYANCE PERMITS
WHICH ARE ELEVATORS, WHICH WE
INSPECT BOTH NEW ELEVATORS AND
ON AN ANNUAL BASIS EVERY YEAR
FOR SAFETY REASONS,
REFRIGERATION PERMITS,
ELECTRICAL PERMITS, THAT TYPE
OF A PERMIT.
>> GREAT, SO THIS IS MORE OF
THE LIFE OF THE BUILDING
RATHER?
>> IT IS BOTH.
>> THANK YOU.
>> WE HAVE THREE SLIDES LEFT.
>> THIS IS ANDY AGAIN.
I CAN TOUCH ON THIS AGAIN.
THIS HAS TO DO WITH OUR SEATTLE
SERVICES PORTAL THAT WENT LIVE
I BELIEVE EARLIER THIS MONTH, I
WANT TO SAY THE 10th OF JUNE.
WHAT HAPPENED HERE IS WE HAD AN
EXTERNAL RESEARCH COMPANY COME
IN AND DO SOME EXPERIENCE
RESEARCH FOR US, SURVEY OUR
APPLICANTS, AND HOW MUCH WE CAN
DO TO BETTER ENHANCE YOUR
EXPERIENCE ON THE PUBLIC PORTAL
AND GET BETTER INFORMATION FROM
THE PORTAL ITSELF, AND WE TOOK
ALL THAT FEEDBACK AND WORKED
WITH SEATTLE I.T.
CLOSELY TO UPDATE THE SEATTLE
SERVICES RECORDS.
MY RECORDS PAGE, WHICH IS THE
PAGE YOU SEARCH ALL YOUR
CURRENT APPLICATIONS AND STATUS
AND TO DOS AND ALL THOSE THINGS
EITHER IN THE CITY'S HANDS OR
FEES NEEDING TO BE PAID OR
CORRECTIONS NEEDED TO BE
RESPONDED TO OUR PERMITS NEEDED
TO BE ISSUED, ET CETERA.
THIS IS JUST A SCREENSHOT OF
THAT SEATTLE SERVICES PORTAL.
A LITTLE HARD TO SEE IN THE
UPPER LEFT-HAND CORNER, BUT YOU
CAN SEE IT SAYS SEATTLE
SERVICES PORTAL THERE.
THIS IS WHAT IS KNOWN AS A HEAT
MAP.
MANY PEOPLE HAVE NEVER SEEN
THIS BEFORE, BUT THOSE FAMILIAR
WITH IT WILL KNOW THAT THE
BROADER THE AREAS, THE MORE
CLICKS THERE ARE ON THOSE
AREAS, AND YOU WILL NOTICE ON
THE UPPER LEFT-HAND CORNER, THE
HOME PAGE AND MY RECORDS TAB IN
THE FARTHEST TO UPPER LEFT
WHICH ARE WHITE-HOT AND RED-HOT
COLORED, AND SECONDARILY, YOU
WILL NOTICE ALONG THE MIDDLE
KIND OF A BAND THAT LOOKS
ALMOST LIKE A STREAK OR COMMENT
ACROSS THE UPPER THIRD POINT OF
THAT SLIDE, AND REALLY WHAT
THOSE ARE OUR NEW FILTERS THAT
WE HAVE PUT IN SO THAT WHEN
SOMEONE ENTERS THEIR NAME OR
THEIR ADDRESS OR ANYTHING THAT
THEY ARE ASSOCIATED WITH, THEY
CAN START FILTERING THEIR
PROJECTS BY THAT, SO THEY LOG
INTO THEIR PORTAL ACCOUNT, ALL
THE PRODUCT THEY ARE ASSOCIATED
WITH WILL SHOW UP IN THE
RECORDS LIST, AND THEY CAN
FILTER BY STATUS, SO IF
SOMETHING IS READY TO BE ISSUED
OR FEES NEED TO BE PAID OR THEY
JUST WANT TO LOOK UP HISTORY,
IT'S ALL THERE.
WE'VE GOT A LOT OF GREAT
FEEDBACK ABOUT THIS, BUT THIS IS
AN EXAMPLE OF THE ONGOING WORK
WE'RE DOING TO IMPROVE THAT
USER EXPERIENCE.
>> ONE GREAT FEEDBACK WE GOT IS
A VERY LARGE MAJOR DOWNTOWN
PROPERTY OWNER, AND THEIR
PROPERTY MANAGER HAD OVER 300
PERMITS THAT THEY WERE TRACKING
FOR THEIR PROPERTIES, AND THE
MAJORITY OF THOSE WERE TRADE
PERMITS AND STREET USE PERMITS,
AND THEY WOULD HAVE TO CREATE
THEIR OWN SPREADSHEET JUST TO
TRACK THOSE DIFFERENT PERMITS,
AND NOW WITH THESE
ENHANCEMENTS, THEY JUST GO TO
ONE SCREEN. IT SAVES A
TREMENDOUS AMOUNT OF TIME.
SO, NEXT SLIDE.
SHAPING SEATTLE. AS YOU RECALL,
SHAPING SEATTLE DEBUTED SEVERAL
YEARS AGO, AND THIS IS AN EASY
WAY TO GET ON THE MAP AND CLICK
ON A BLUE DOT AND SEE A
PROJECT.
A LOT OF PEOPLE DON'T KNOW THE
PROJECT ADDRESS, BUT THEY CAN'T
GO ON A MAP. WE HAD TO TAKE
SHAPING SEATTLE DOWN FOR A
WHILE WHILE HE IMPROVED THE
SKUNK KNOWLEDGE IT, BUT IT CAME
BACK TO INCLUDE ALL MASTERY
PERMITS, ALL BUILDING PERMITS.
WE HAVE NOW ADDED ALL CODE
COMPLAINT FILES TO THIS, AND
WE'RE ALSO WORKING TO BRING ALL
THE RENTAL REGISTRATION
INSPECTION ORDINANCE SITES INTO
SHAPING SEATTLE AS WELL.
THIS IS A FANTASTIC TOOL FOR
STAFF AND PUBLIC THAT CONTINUES
TO EXPAND, AND AGAIN, YOU CAN
PRESS ONE OF THOSE BLUE DOTS,
AND ALL THE RELEVANT
INFORMATION COMES UP.
>> TO ADD TO THAT, SHAPING
SEATTLE IS ALSO A WORK IN
PROGRESS.
THIS CURRENTLY EXISTS TO SHOW
ALL ACTIVE APPLICATIONS AND
ACTIVE PERMITS, BUT OUR DESIRE
IS TO ALSO ENHANCE THIS AND
FURTHER INCLUDE PERMIT HISTORY
AS WELL AND ALL PAST ISSUE
PERMITS AND FINAL PERMITS AS
WELL.
THAT IS KIND OF THE NEXT STEP,
BUT SOMEWHERE, WE WILL LOOK AT
IT.
>> THAT WILL BE A HUGE
IMPROVEMENT BECAUSE THERE ARE A
LOT OF MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC OR
APPLICANTS THAT NEED TO DO
PERMIT RESEARCH, AND THEY HAVE
TO PHYSICALLY COME DOWN TO THE
SEATTLE MUNICIPAL TOWER AND GO
THROUGH OUR MICROPHONE RECORDS,
WHERE NOW DURING THE PANDEMIC,
THEY NEED TO EMAIL STAFF AND
HAVE STAFF GET THOSE DOCUMENTS,
SO THAT COULD SAVE A
CONSIDERABLE AMOUNT OF TIME FOR
PUBLIC.
>> COUPLED WITH THAT, WE'RE IN
THE PROCESS OF CONVERTING ALL
THAT MICROPHONE AND MICRO FEED
INTO ELECTRIC DONICA MAKE
SYSTEM, SO THEY WILL ALL BE
ELECTRONICALLY ACCESSIBLE IN
SINGLE PLACES, SO THAT IS A
GOOD THING.
>> SO THIS IS NATHAN AGAIN.
WE WENT THROUGH A LOT OF THESE
IN PREVIOUS DISCUSSION, JUST
ABOUT OUR NEW HIRES TO SUPPORT
PERMIT REVIEW.
ONE ADDITIONAL AD HERE WE DID
NOT COVER BEFORE IS WE HAVE
JUST HIRED TWO NEW PROCESS
IMPROVEMENT AND TECHNOLOGY
MANAGERS THAT WILL REALLY HELP
US WITH OUR CONTINUOUS
IMPROVEMENT AND OUR STRATEGIC
TECHNOLOGY PLANNING AND OUR
CUSTOMER SERVICE BECAUSE WE
KNOW THAT TECHNOLOGY IS THE
BACKGROUND OF EVERYTHING THAT
WE DO AT SDCI.
I JUST WANTED TO THROW OUT SOME
OTHER IDEAS FOR YOU ALL TO
THINK ABOUT HOW WE CAN IMPROVE
PERMITTING.
I KNOW THIS WILL BE OF SPECIAL
INTEREST TO YOU, COUNCILMEMBER
STRAUSS, AND TO YOU,
COUNCILMEMBER MOSQUEDA.
THE SEPA PROCESS, IT DOES TAKE
TIME, AND SEPA PROJECTS CAN BE
APPEALED, SEPA PROJECTS ARE
IMPORTANT TO NEIGHBORHOODS
BECAUSE IT DOES PROVIDE PUBLIC
COMMENT PROCESS AND AN APPEAL
PROCESS IF THE COMMUNITY IS
UNHAPPY WITH THE PROJECT, BUT
SEPA THRESHOLDS COULD BE RAISED
FOR PROJECTS OUTSIDE URBAN
VILLAGES, AND SEPA THRESHOLDS
COULD BE RAISED FOR COMMERCIAL
PROJECTS. I AM JUST THROWING
THAT OUT THERE.
ALSO, THERE ARE I THINK CHANGES
THAT WE CAN MAKE TO OUR DESIGN
REVIEW PROGRAM TO MAKE THAT
FASTER. AS PART OF THE SEPA
PROCESS, WE OFTEN HAVE TO DO
TRAFFIC STUDIES FOR THE STATE
SEPA REGULATIONS, BUT IN ANY
CASE, WE DON'T HAVE THE ABILITY
TO ACQUIRE MITIGATION, SO THAT
COULD BE FRUSTRATING FOR
NEIGHBORHOODS AND FOR THE
DEVELOPER THAT HAD TO GO TO THE
EXPENSE OF DOING THE TRAFFIC
STUDY, BUT THEN WE DON'T HAVE
THE AUTHORITY OR WHEREWITHAL TO
REQUIRE MITIGATION FOR ANY
TRAFFIC IMPACTS THAT ARE
IDENTIFIED. THAT WAS AN ISSUE.
I KNOW I HAVE RAISED THIS MANY
TIMES.
MY STAFF ARE GETTING TIRED OF
ME TALKING ABOUT IT, BUT THE
LAND USE CODE IS OVER 1000
PAGES LONG.
IT IS VERY COMPLICATED.
IT IS FRUSTRATING FOR THE PUBLIC
, FOR STAFF, AND FOR OUR
APPLICANTS.
THAT IS REALLY CHALLENGING AND
A LONG-TERM PROJECT TO TRY TO
IMPROVE THAT LAND USE CODE.
I THINK IT IS SOMETHING THAT WE
NEED TO TACKLE.
>> THANK YOU, AND WELL NOTED.
I REALLY WANT TO THANK YOU,
DARLENE, ANDY, AND DIRECTOR
TORGELSON FOR NOT ONLY THIS
MEETING.
ALL THE MEETINGS THAT YOU
BRIEFED ME ON IN EDUCATION
PROVIDED TO ME IN ORDER TO
ALLOW ME TO LEAD US AND
REASSESS THE GOALS IN ENSURING
THAT EVERY NODE OF EVERY
DEPARTMENT THAT TOUCHES PERMIT
REVIEW THAT IS FULLY STAFFED
AND HAS A LITTLE BIT OF BONUS
STAFF IN CASE SOMEBODY WANTS TO
AKE DESERVED LEAVE FOR
RETIRING OR MOVING ONTO ANOTHER
JOB.
I LOOK FORWARD TO HEARING FROM
ALL OF YOU AND COUNCILMEMBER
MOSQUEDA, TO HAVE ROUND TABLE
SESSIONS, CULMINATING IN THE
LUNCH AND LEARN ABOUT IMPROVING
THE PERMIT SYSTEM FOLLOWING THE
BUDGET PROCESS.
>> THANK YOU FOR HAVING US.
>> THANKS.
>> GREAT TO SEE YOU ALL.
>> THANK YOU.
>> AND COLLEAGUES, THAT WAS OUR
FINAL ITEM OF OUR AGENDA TODAY.
WE HAD PREVIOUSLY PLANNED TO
HEAR FROM OP CD TODAY REGARDING
THEIR RACIAL EQUITY REPORT THAT
WILL AND FORMED A COMPREHENSIVE
PLAN MAJOR UPDATE PROCESS.
THE PRESENTATION HAS
UNFORTUNATELY BEEN DELAYED.
WE EXPECT TO HEAR IT IN JULY.
VICE CHAIR MOSQUEDA?
>> THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR.
I DO WANT TO MAKE SOME COMMENTS
ABOUT THE ITEM REMOVED FROM
TODAY'S AGENDA, AND I
APPRECIATE, MR. CHAIR, YOUR
FLEXIBILITY IN MAKING A FEW
COMMENTS ABOUT THIS SINCE IT'S
NOT TECHNICALLY ON THE AGENDA,
BUT IT WAS.
THANK YOU.
FOR THE RECORD, IN 2018, WE
INCLUDED A PROVISION THAT
REQUIRED A RACIAL EQUITY
TOOLKIT.
THIS TOOLKIT WAS TO EVALUATE
THE CITY'S GROWTH STRATEGY AND
MADE SURE WE LOOK AT AN
ANALYSIS TO UNDERSTAND THE
EMBEDDED CONCERNS AND
PRIORITIES WITHIN OUR EARLY
PLANNING AND COMMUNITY OUTREACH
PROGRAM PRIOR TO INITIATING THE
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGN
DISCUSSIONS COMING UP IN 2023
AND 2024.
THE IMPORTANCE OF THIS RACIAL
EQUITY TOOLKIT WAS SO THAT WE
COULD HAVE A CLEAR
UNDERSTANDING OF HOW OUR
EXISTING ZONING POLICIES ARE
EITHER FURTHERING AND
CONTRIBUTING TO DISCRIMINATORY
ZONING PRACTICES, PUSHING
PEOPLE OUT OF THE CITY, AND
CREATING AN INEQUITABLE HOUSING
SITUATION, OR WHETHER THEY WERE
MEETING THE GOALS.
THE REPORT WAS DUE BACK IN
DECEMBER OF 2019.
THIS WAS THEN DELAYED TO EARLY
2020.
COVID HIT, AND WE WERE TOLD WE
COULD EXPECT A REPORT IN 2021,
WHICH WE ASSUMED WAS
REASONABLE, GIVEN THE
CONSEQUENCES OF COVID ON OUR
PUBLIC SECTOR EMPLOYEES IN WAYS
WE COULD ENGAGE WITH FOLKS HERE
IT SINCE THEN, IT HAS BEEN
DELAYED MONTHLY.
WE TRULY CANNOT AFFORD
ADDITIONAL DELAYS, AND A GREAT
WAY OF PUSHING THE CHAIR'S
COMMITMENT TO THIS ISSUE, I
KNOW YOU TRY TO INCLUDE THIS IN
YOUR AGENDA THE PAST FEW
MONTHS, AND I APPRECIATE YOU
UNDERSCORING YOUR EXPECTATION
IS THAT THIS WILL COME AND IF
YOU LIKE.
WE CANNOT AFFORD ANY ADDITIONAL
DELAYS, GIVEN THAT THIS
CRITICAL REPORT MUST BE MADE
PUBLIC SO THAT IT WILL HELP US
LAY THE FOUNDATION FOR WHAT IS
NEEDED IN THE COMPREHENSIVE
PLAN UPDATE.
THAT PROCESS BEGINS THIS YEAR.
THIS REPORT IS MEDICAL FOR
HELPING US UNDERSTAND AND TRACK
A COURSE THAT MAKES SURE THAT
WE'RE ON A PATH TOWARDS TRUE
EQUITY IN OUR ZONING POLICIES,
THAT WE REALLY HAVE A CHANCE TO
EXAMINE SOME OF THE FUNDAMENTAL
ASPECTS OF OUR GROWTH STRATEGY
AND UNDERSTAND WHERE THERE'S
PITFALLS.
SEATTLE LAND-USE IS ROOTED IN A
HISTORY OF RACIST POLICIES OR
REDLINING POLICIES THAT HAVE
LOCKED BLACK, INDIGENOUS, AND
COMMUNITIES OF COLOR OUT OF
NEIGHBORHOODS WHERE THERE ARE
HIGH OPPORTUNITIES.
OPPORTUNITIES HAVE DECREASED
BECAUSE OF LACK OF ACCESS TO
HOUSING ACROSS OUR CITY . THAT
AFFECT GENERATIONAL WEALTH, AS
WE KNOW.
THE EFFECTS OF THE EXCLUSIONARY
ZONE POLICIES CONTINUE TODAY.
WE KNOW THAT.
THERE'S NO DOUBT ABOUT IT, AND
A RACIAL EQUITY TOOLKIT IS A
TOOL FOR US TO BE ABLE TO
UNDERSTAND HOW WE AS A CITY CAN
IDENTIFY WAYS TO ADDRESS THE
SKYROCKETING COST OF HOUSING,
MAKE SURE WE'RE LOOKING AT THE
LAST DECADE OF LENDING OF
HOUSING AFFORDABILITY THAT HAS
LED TO HOUSING AFFORDABILITY AND
THE HOMELESSNESS CRISES
IMPACTING BIPOC COMMUNITIES.
KNOW THE ECONOMIC CRISIS
WORSENING DUE TO THE CAR-
CENTRIC COMMUTING PROBLEMS THAT
WE HAVE BECAUSE PEOPLE GET
PUSHED OUT OF THE CITY IS IN
PART RELATED BACK TO OUR
EXCLUSIONARY ZONING POLICIES
THIRD SO MR. CHAIR, I
APPRECIATE YOUR FLEXIBILITY IN
ALLOWING FOR US TO CONTINUE TO
DEMAND THAT THIS REPORT GETS
SHARED, AND I APPRECIATE FOLKS
ARE STILL TRYING TO WORK AS
FAST AS THEY CAN IN THE
AFTERMATH OF THE LAST YEAR OF
COVID, BUT WE REALLY MUST HAVE
THIS REPORT SHARED WITH US SO
WE CAN HAVE THE ESSENTIAL
INFORMATION IN FRONT OF US TO
ADDRESS WHAT IS NEEDED TO BE
CHANGED IN A COPPER HAS A PLAN,
AND I VERY MUCH LOOK FORWARD TO
WORKING WITH YOU IN THE
UPCOMING JULY 14th MEETING TO
HAVE THE FINAL REPORT
PRESENTED.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH, VICE
CHAIR MOSQUEDA FOR THAT
BACKGROUND, AND I DO HOPE OUR
COMMITTEE MEETINGS ARE GOING TO
BE PACKED FOR THE REMAINDER OF
THE YEAR, AND THAT IS WHY I WAS
REALLY HOPING TO HAVE THAT
REPORT DONE TODAY, SO WE'LL
MAKE TIME FOR IT IN JULY, AND
NEED TO HAVE IT IN JULY SO WE
HAVE THE ABILITY TO IMPLEMENT
RECOMMENDATIONS BEFORE WE TAKE
IT TO A CONFERENCE A PLAN IN
SEPTEMBER.
THANK YOU.
COLLEAGUES, ANY OTHER COMMENTS?
SEEING NONE.
>>> THIS CONCLUDES THE
WEDNESDAY, JUNE 23rd, 2021
MEETING OF THE LAND-USE
NEIGHBORHOODS COMMITTEE, AND AS
A WRITER COMICS COMMITTEE WILL
BE ON JULY 14, STARTING AT 9:40
A.M.
. THANK YOU FOR ATTENDING.
IT IS CALLED: 02, AND WE ARE
ADJOURNED.