>>> SEPTEMBER 21, 2021 LAND &
USE COMMITTEE MEETING WILL COME
TO ORDER.
ROLE TAKEN.
>> THREE PRESENT.
>> THANK YOU.
AS ALWAYS THE LANDS USE
COMMITTEE IN THE CITY OF
SEATTLE BEGINS OUR MEETINGS
WITH THE LAND ACKNOWLEDGMENT,
SO WE WILL TAKE A MOMENT TO
PAUSE AS WE ACKNOWLEDGE.
WE ARE ON THE TRADITIONAL AN
ANCESTRAL LANDS OF THE PEOPLE
IN THIS REGION PAST AND
PRESENT.
WE HONOR WITH GRATITUDE THE
PEOPLE OF THIS LAND.
WE START WITH ACKNOWLEDGMENT WE
ARE GUESTS ON THIS LAND AND
NEED TO STEWARD OUR LAND AS
SUNSHINE.
THIS IS NOT A CHECKLIST IT
DOESN'T GIVE US PASSPORT TO DO
WHATEVER WE WANT BUT IT IS A
MOMENT FOR US TO STOP, REFLECT
AND STEWARD OUR WORK AS GUESTS
BECAUSE OUR TIME IS SHORT.
A MINUTE TO PAUSE.
WE HAVE FIVE ITEMS ON THE
AGENDA WHICH ARE PUBLIC COMMENT
ITEMS SO THIS WILL BE A FAIRLY
LONG MEETING WHICH COULD BE
FOLLOWED UP ON FRIDAY.
WE HAVE COUNCIL BILL 120149
WHICH MAXIMIZES SPORTS AND
REACTION ZONES.
AND SECOND COUNCIL BILL 120104
WHICH MAKES SEVERAL AMENDMENTS
TO THE PLAN.
120155 WHICH ALSO AMENDS
THE PLAN TO CHANGE THE NAME OF
SINGLE FAMILY AREAS TO
NEIGHBORHOOD RESIDENTIAL AREAS.
FOUR, WE HAVE COUNCIL BILL
120153 WHICH ADJUSTS THE
STANDARDS FOR SMALL LOTS TO
ALLOW FOR PROBLEMS AND
CONSTRUCTION.
THIS IS THE ITEM WE MAY GO TO
TODAY IF COUNCILMEMBERS ARE
COMFORTABLE SINCE WE HAVE
ALREADY HAD THIS BILL PRESENTED
TO US IN THIS COMMITTEE.
LASTLY AND FIFTH, WE HAVE
COUNCIL BILL 120121 WHICH ADOPT
AS TRANSFERABLE DEVELOPMENT
RIGHTS PROGRAM IN SNOHOMISH
COUNTY.
AGAIN, THE NEXT MEETING IS THIS
FRIDAY FOR THE LANDS & USE
COMMITTEE STARTING AT 2:00 P.M.
BEFORE WE BEGIN, IF THERE IS TO
OBJECTION THE AGENDA WILL BE
ADOPTED.
HEARING NO OBJECTION, THE
AGENDA IS ADOPTED.
AT THIS POINT WE WILL OPEN THE
REMOTE PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD
FOR ITEM ON TODAY'S AGENDA.
I ASK THAT EVERYONE BE PATIENT
AS WE LEARN TO OPERATE THE
SSTEM IN REALTIME.
PLEASE KEEP IN MIND THEE ARE
SEPARATE PUBLIC HEARINGS FOR
EACH ITEM ON TODAY'S AGENDA.
IF YOU ARE SPEAKING TO ONE OF
THOSE ITEM, PLEASE RESERVE YOUR
COMMENTS IF FOR THE APPROPRIATE
COMMENT HEARING.
DO WE NEED TO RUN THROUGH THE
SCRIPT IF NOBODY IS SIGNED UP
FOR PUBLIC COMMENT?
>> COUNCILMEMBER STRAUSS, IF
YOU WOULD LIKE TO CONFIRM WITH
I-T THAT THERE ARE NO ECONOMIC
COMMENTERS, YOU MAY PROCEED TO
THE NEXT BUSINESS ITEM.
>> CAN WE CONFIRM THERE ARE NO
PUBLIC REGISTRANTS AT THIS
TIME?
THERE ARE CURRENTLY NO PUBLIC
COMMENT REGISTRANTS.
THANK YOU.
SEEING WE HAVE NO SPEAKERS
SIGNED UP OR REMOTELY PRESENT,
THIS IS NOW CLOSED AND WE WILL
MOVE ONTO THE NEXT AGENDA ITEM.
WE HAVE BEEN JOINED BY
COUNCILMEMBER LEWIS.
GRANDMOTHER COUNCILMEMBER
LEWIS.
>> GOOD MORNING COUNCILMEMBER
STRAUSS.
>> OUR FIRST ITEM OF BUSINESS
IS A PUBLIC HEARING AND 120-149
WHICH INCREASES THE MAXIMUM
SIZE OF SPORTS AND REACTION
USES OF INDUSTRIAL GENERAL 2
ZONES.
WILL YOU PLEASE READ THE
ABBREVIATED TITLE INTO THE
RECORD.
[ TITLE BEING READ INTO THE
RECORD ]
>> THANK YOU.
FOR THIS ITEM WE WILL OPEN THE
PUBLIC HEARING FIRST AFTER
WHICH WE WILL HEAR FROM MEMBERS
OF THE MAYOR'S OFFICE, O WITH,
CD AND COUNCIL CENTRAL STAFF.
SO, WE MOVE TO OPEN THE PUBLIC
HEARING ON COUNCIL BILL 120-
149.
BEFORE WE OPEN THE REMOTE
PUBLIC HEARING I WOULD ASK THAT
EVERYONE BE PATIENT AS WE
CONTINUE TO LEARN TO OPERATE
THE SYSTEM IN REALTIME AND
NAVIGATE THROUGH THE INEVITABLE
GROWING PAINS.
WE ARE CONTINUOUSLY LOOKING FOR
WAYS TO FINE-TUNE THIS PROCESS
AND ADD NEW FEATURES THAT ALLOW
FOR ADDITIONAL
EMERALD CITY HAS BEEN OUR HOME
FOR 21 YEARS AND WE HAVE WON
FOUR WMBA CHAMPIONSHIPS.
WE HAVE BEEN PROVIDED
SIGNIFICANT PUBLIC BENEFIT TO
THE COMMUNITY AND OF COURSE WE
PROVIDE BASKETBALL.
OUR SOURCE FOR CHANGE
INITIATIVE FOCUS ON VOTER
EDUCATION, SUPPORTING USE IN
COMMUNITIES, EXEMPLIFYING BLACK
WOMEN AND SUPPORTING --
BUSINESSES.
WE HAVE A LONG HISTORY OF
ENGAGING IN THE LGBTQ+
COMMUNITY.
BOTH OUR PLAYERS AND OWNERS
ARE NEVER SHY ABOUT STANDING UP
FOR IMPORTANT CAUSES WHETHER IT
IS "BLACK LIVES MATTER," SAY
YOUR NAME, BLOOD OR TO ENDORSE
BIDEN-HARRISBURG.
TOGETHER WITH OUR MANY
CORPORATE PARTNERS WE HAVE
RAISED AND DONATED HUNDREDS OF
THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS JUST IN
THE PAST TWO YEARS TO SUPPORT
OUR CITY THROUGH A PARTICULARLY
ROUGH TIME.
EVERYTHING WE DO REFLECTS OUR
COMMUNITY'S VALUE THROUGH
EQUITY, DIVERSITY AND
INCLUSION.
WE ASK YOU, OUR CITY GOVERNMENT
TO EXTEND THE TRADITION OF
SUPPORTING THE FRANCHISE
THROUGH THE STORM SO WE CAN
CONTINUE TO REPRESENT YOU,
WINNING ON THE COURT AND
PROMOTING THE POWER OF EQUITY,
AS WELL.
THANK YOU SO MUCH.
>> THANK YOU.
GOOD MORNING, SUE.
>> GOOD MORNING, HI.
THIS IS SUMMERSET.
I HAVE PLAYED MY ENTIRE CAREER
HERE IN SEATTLE SINCE 2002 AND
BEEN A PART OF ALL FOUR OF THE
CHAMPIONSHIP TEAMS.
THE WAY I SEE IT, MY TEAMMATES
AND I HAVE ALWAYS GIVEN OUR
BEST BOTH ON AND OFF THE COURT
TO MAKE THE CITY RIGHT AND KEEP
AT BEST OF THE WMBA FRANCHISE,
IN MY OPINION.
NOW WE ARE HOPING THE CITY WILL
DO A PART TO PAVE THE WAY FOR A
SUCCESSFUL FUTURE FOR THE
STORM.
I GOT DRAFTED IN 2002 SO I HAVE
A UNIQUE PERSPECTIVE OF SEEING
A LOT CHANGE IN THE LEAGUE AND
THERE HAS BEEN A SHIFT
RECENTLY.
WHETHER I LOOK AT THE LANDSCAPE
THE COMPETING WITH OTHER
FRANCHISES IS CRUEL.
WE WILL INDICATE THE IMPORTANCE
OF SUPPORTING WMBA PLAYERS
WHETHER DRAFTED HERE MYSELF,
MAKING COMMITMENT TO WOMEN AND
GIRLS THAT ARE NOT ACCUSTOMED
TO SEEING SPORTS HIGHLIGHTED OR
PUT ON EQUAL FOOTING WITH MEN.
I HAVEN'T EVEN SEEP THAT IN MY
TIME, AND THAT COULD BE EVEN
MORE IMPORTANT THAN RAISING
TROPHIES.
I URGE YOU TO APPROVE THE CODE
AMENDMENT, AND THANK YOU FOR
YOUR TIME.
>> THANK YOU, SUE.
GOOD LUCK ON SUNDAY.
WE ARE HONORED TO HAVE YOU
REPRESENTING OUR CITY AND WE
ARE INCREDIBLY PROUD OF YOU.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
I APPRECIATE THAT
>> ABSOLUTELY.
MICHAEL SUN, I SEE YOU ARE NOT
PRESENT AT THIS TIME BUT
MICHAEL, IF YOU ARE LISTENING,
PLEASE DO CALL IN.
MAUREEN, GOOD MORNING
>> THANK YOU.
MY NAME IS IRENE WH ACTIONER L.
I STRONGLY URL YOU TO REJECT
THIS DISGUISED AN AN AMENDMENT.
ASK YOURSELF WHY THE CODE
CHANGE EVEN SURFACED NOW?
DID THE PARKS DEPARTMENT ASK TO
PUT IN AN INDOOR SPORTS
FACILITY?
NO.
DID ANYONE DECIDE TO ASK FOR
THIS?
>> NO.
WHY WOULD YOU ALLOW THIS IN A
INDUSTRIAL AREA WHEN BOTH THE
PLANNING COMMISSION AND MAYOR'S
INDUSTRIAL AND MARITIME
STRATEGY COUNCIL RECENTLY SAID
CLOSE THE LOOPHOLES THAT HAVE
ALLOWED TOO MANY NON-INDUSTRIAL
USES TO BE SERVED IN LIMITED IG
ZONE LAND.
INSTEAD THE MAYOR WANTS TO
REOPEN A NEW LOOPHOLE.
SCC INSIGHT YESTERDAY CLEARLY
SPELLED OUT THE LEGALITIES AND
IRREGULARITIES BEHIND THE
OBVIOUS SPOT REZONE.
READ IT BEFORE YOU VOTE ON
THIS.
INSIST THE REQUEST GO THROUGH
THE CONTRACT REZONE PROCESS
THAT ANY OTHER PROPERTY OWNER
SEEKING THIS CHANGE WOULD HAVE
TO DO.
THE SEATTLE STORM CAN HAVE A
PRACTICE FACILITY IN A
COMMERCIAL ZONE ELSEWHERE WHERE
IN THE CITY.
AND GIVEN THE STATED PUBLIC
BENEFITS TO OPENING THE
FACILITY TO B IPO C KIDS,
PLACING IT BETWEEN QUEEN ANNE
AND MAGNOLIA IS A STRIKING
CONTRADICTION.
IF THE GOAL IS DISPARATE
BETWEEN MEN AND WOMEN IN
PROFESSIONAL SPORT, THEN THE
STORM PRACTICE FIELD BELONGS IN
THE STADIUM DISTRICT.
SAME AS BASKETBALL FANS CHRIS
HANSEN HAS A LOT OF SPARE
PROPERTY THERE.
IF YOU ARE GOING TO DEDOWNGRADE
AN INDUSTRIAL AREA FOR SPORT,
THIS IS OBVIOUSLY PLACE TO DO
IT.
THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU, IRENE
>> UP NEXT WE HAVE LAURA.
GOOD MORNING.
>> MY NAME IS LAURA AND I AM
PART OF THE ACTION CALLED SHARE
THE STAY ACTION IF YOU FIND.
WE DID A WALKING TOUR WITH OUR
EDUCATION SIDE IN THE INTERBAY
AREA IN THE MIDDLE OF
THUNDERSTORM AND THAT WAS A
DISCUSSION ABOUT THE FUTURE OF
OUR INDUSTRIAL LAND.
FOLKS ARE JUST LEARNING ABOUT
INDUSTRIAL MARITIME STRATEGY.
WHEN WE CONTRACT.
VERY LAST MINUTE INFORMED THE
SEATTLE PLANNING COMMISSION
THAT THIS IS HAPPENING.
IT SEEMS VERY DIFFERENT THAN
WHAT WE HAVE CALLED ON.
FOR EXAMPLE, MAGNOLIA, THE
HOUSING ABOVE THE GROCERY STORE
FOR YEARS. THEY HAVE GOTTEN A
FAST PASS.
ABSOLUTELY LOVE THE STORM,
CHAMPIONING OUR GREAT WOMEN'S
BASKETBALL TEAM.
PROUD TO HAVE YOU IN THE CITY.
THEY ABSOLUTELY DESERVE A
PRACTICE FACILITY, BUT THE LAND
COMMITTEE LOOKS TO HOW WE MAKE
OUR INDUSTRIAL MARITIME
STANDARD AND RESIDENTIAL ZONING
CHANGES OVER THE NEXT
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE, JUST
THINK ABOUT HOW THIS PROCESS IS
IN CONTRAST TO THE HOUSING THAT
WE NEED AND THE HOUSING CRISIS
AND HOW SLOW THAT IS AND HOW
QUICKLY AND EVENLY WITHOUT A
LOT OF PUBLIC KNOWLEDGE TO
UNDERSTAND WHAT WAS GOING ON AS
WE MOVE FORWARD.
I WILL LOOK INTO THAT MOON JAE-
IN SIGHT, ARTICLES AND WASN'T
MENTIONED IN THE ARTICLE.
>> THANK YOU, LAURA.
I RECEIVED INFORMATION THAT
MICHAEL SUN CALLED INTO THE
WRONG LINE, SO I AM GOING TO
GIVE HIM JUST A SECOND TO SEE
IF WE ARE ABLE TO HAVE HIM JOIN
THE CORRECT PHONE LINE.
I SEE MICHAEL IS NOW PRESENT.
GOOD MORNING, MICHAEL.
MICHAEL SUN
>> GOOD MORNING.
>> GOOD MORNING!
>> HAVING TECHNICAL TICKETS, MY
APOLOGIES.
MY NAME IS MICHAEL SUN AND I
LIVE APPROXIMATELY A THOUSAND
FEET FROM THE NEAREST PROPERTY
PROPOSED.
WE HAVE TWO YOUNG ACTIVE
CHILDREN AND I HOPE THE
COMMITTEE GIVES SIGNIFICANT
WEIGHT DIRECTLY IMPACTED BY
THIS PROPOSAL.
I STRONGLY ADVOCATE IN FAVOR OF
CHANGES THAT WOULD MAKE
FACILITIES LEEK THIS POSSIBLE.
I WOULD LOVE TO SAY I AM
RAISING RANGE RESILIENT
CHILDREN BUT THE NORTHWEST
BRINGS INCLEMENT WEATHER THAT
MAKES PHYSICAL ACTIVITY AND
RECREATIONAL PLAY A REAL
CHALLENGE IN THE WINTER MONTHS.
I THINK YOU ONLY NEED TO LOOK
AT THE EARLY SUCCESS OF AN
EXEMPT RARE COMMITTEE.
I SIGNED MY SON UP FOR THE
HOCKEY PROGRAM AND ASTONISHED
WITH THE USE JUST LAST NIGHT.
I FULFILLED THE RACIALLY BIRTH
FIRST DOWN.
IMMEDIATELY AFTERWARD THE LOBBY
AND DRESSING ROOMS WERE FILLED
WITH WOMEN WAITING THEIR TURN
TO TAKE THE ICE FOR A FEMALE
HOCKEY LEAGUE.
THE MAIN DRAW BACK MY FAMILY IS
REQUIRED TO MAKE THE TREK FROM
MAGNOLIA TO THE EDGE OF THE
CITY TO AVAIL THIS INCREDIBLE
FACILITY SO I WOULD LIKE TO SAY
WE MOVE FORWARD AS PROPOSED SO
PEOPLE CAN ENJOY THE FACILITY
FOR HEALTH AND WELLNESS.
WE HAVE ENORMOUS INFRASTRUCTURE
CHALLENGES SO I SINCERELY HOPE
THE CITY PLACES HIGH PRIORITY
ON THE WELL BEING OF
NEIGHBORING FAMILIES.
I APPRECIATE THE COMMITTEE'S
TIME.
THANK YOU
>> THANK YOU, MICHAEL.
I-T, CAN YOU CONFIRM WE HAVE NO
PUBLIC REGISTRANTS HERE FOR
THIS ITEM?
OKAY.
THAT WAS OUR LAST SPEAKER
REMOTELY PRESENT TO SPEAK AT
THIS PUBLIC HEARING.
THE PUBLIC HEARING ON COUNCIL
BILL 120-149 IS NOW CLOSED.
THANK YOU TO EVERYWHERE WHO
PROVIDED PUBLIC TESTIMONY
TODAY.
WE WILL TRANSITION TO A
PRESENTATION.
WE ARE JOINED BY
REPRESENTATIVES FROM THE
MAYOR'S OFFICE, OPCD, AND
COUNCIL CENTRAL STAFF INCLUDING
THE INTERMITTENT DIRECTOR.
WILL FOLKS INTRODUCE THEMSELVES
AND KICK US OFF?
>> YEAH.
I AM ADRIAN THOMPSON, THE
POLICY DIRECTOR FOR MAYOR
DURKAN.
>> WONDERFUL.
WELCOME BACK AND TAKE US AWAY
WITH THE PRESENTATION.
>> I CAN GO AND KICK US OFF.
ADRIAN THOMPSON, THE POLICY
DIRECTOR FOR MAYOR DURKAN.
I WANT TO THANK YOU, CHAIR
STRAUSS AND MEMBERS OF THE
COMMITTEETORS PRESENT THIS
MORNING TO YOU AN EXCITING
OPPORTUNITY ON BEHALF OF MAYOR
DURKAN WE ARE EXCITED TO
PRESENT COUNCIL BILL 120-149 TO
THE CITY COUNCIL THIS MORNING.
WHILE DIRECTOR AND THE OPCD
TEAM WILL BE GOING INTO MORE OF
THE DETAIL, I WANTED TO
PROVIDE YOU ALL A HIGH LEVEL
OVERVIEW OF WHY THE MAYOR
TRANSCENDED THIS LEGISLATION.
WE AS A CITY HAVE LOOKED FOR
WAYS TO SUPPORT SPORTS AND
RECREATIONAL FACILITIES IN THE
SAME WAY WE PRIORITIZED THE
STADIUM DISTRICT, HOME TO MEN'S
SPORTS TEAMS SUCH AS THE
MARINER, SOUNDERS AND SEAHAWKS
AND WE HAVE CELEBRATED THE SOON
TO BE OPEN CLIMATE PLEDGE ARENA
AND THE NEW PRACTICE FACILITIES
FOR THE LATEST MEN'S SPORTS
TEAM THE KRAKEN.
OVER THE PAST SEVERAL MAYORAL
ADMINISTRATIONS THERE HAS BEEN
A HEALTHY TENSION WITHIN THE
MARITIME AND INDUSTRIAL
COMMUNITY, RESIDENTS, HOUSING
AND OTHERS TO DETERMINE THE
FUTURE OF OUR INDUSTRIAL LANDS.
THE MAYOR CONVENED OVER THE
PAST TWO YEARS THROUGH COVID-19
A STAKEHOLDER ENGAGEMENT
PROCESS THAT PRODUCED A SET OF
RECOMMENDATIONS THAT
STRENGTHENED TO PROTECT OUR
INDUSTRIAL LANDS.
WORKING DIRECTLY WITH
STAKEHOLDERS AND CITY COUNCIL,
OPCD HAS MOVED FORWARD ON CEPA,
WILL CONDUCT A COMPREHENSIVE
STUDY AND LEGISLATION TO BE
TAKEN UP BY KIM LATER THIS
YEAR.
WE HEARD FROM SOME STAKEHOLDERS
THAT WE AS A CITY NEED TO FIND
MORE WAYS TO SUPPORT SPORTS AND
RECREATIONAL FACILITIES.
THIS LEGISLATION BEFORE YOU
TODAY THAT YOU ARE CONSIDERING
IS COMPATIBLE WITH BOTH THE
GOAL TO PROTECT OUR INDUSTRIAL
LANDS AND SUPPORT AN INDOOR
RECREATIONAL FACILITY TO ENABLE
SPORTS FACILITIES IN VERY
LIMITED INDUSTRIAL USES.
COMPARED TO OTHER USES SUCH AS
LARGE OFFICES AND RETAIL
DEVELOPMENT, INDOOR SPORTS AND
REACTION DOES NOT CREATE AS
MUCH OF A DEMAND FOR TRIPS AND
VISITS BY NON-INDUSTRIAL USERS.
THIS LEGISLATION DOES NOT APPLY
TO SPECTATOR SPORTS FACILITIES.
INDOOR SPORTS AND REACTION
STRUCTURES ARE SIMILAR AND
PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS TO
INDUSTRIAL STRUCTURES.
FURTHER, THE LIMITING CRITERIA
CONTAINED IN THE LEGISLATION
PREVENTS LOCATION OF AN INDOOR
SPORTS AND REACTION FACILITY
ANYWHERE IN THE BULK OF
INDUSTRIAL OR MARITIME ZONE
LAND.
úBY PASSING THIS LEGISLATION,
SPORTS TEAMS SUCH AS THE
SEATTLE STORM, WHICH HAS NOT
HISTORICALLY HAD AN ADVOCATE IN
CITY HALL, WILL HAVE MORE
OPTIONS AVAILABLE TO BUILD
LOCAL FACILITIES.
I AM GOING TO NOW TURN THE
PRESENTATION OVER TO DIRECTOR
ANDANDO.
>> THANK YOU, ADRIENNE.
MY COMMENTS WILL BE BRIEF AS I
WANT TO TURN IT OVER TO OUR
EXPERT. I
APPRECIATE THE AUDIENCE TODAY
AND THE PRESENTATION.
I LOOK FORWARD TO A DISCUSSION
THERE AFTER.
I HAVE BEEN VERY PROUD TO BE
INVOLVED IN OUR INDUSTRIAL
MARITIME STRATEGY WORK WITH OUR
STAKEHOLDERS AND WHAT WE HAVE
LIFTED UP IN TERMS OF THE 11
STRATEGIES THAT WE ARE NOW
SEEING FORWARD.
LEGISLATION THIS YEAR AND OUR
EIS PROCESS.
A LOT OF GREAT WORK AHEAD.
AND I THINK THAT THE
LEGISLATION THAT WE ARE
SPEAKING ABOUT TODAY IS NOT
CONSISTENT WITH THE LARGER BODY
OF WORK SO NOW TO JEFF WHO WILL
PULL UP THE SLIDE WITH
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION FOR YOU
TO CONSIDER.
>> THANK YOU, RICO.
DO YOU ALL SEE THE SLIDES AND
CAN YOU HEAR ME?
>> YES TO BOTH.
>> GREAT.
I WILL BE PROVIDING YOU WITH A
VERY BRIEF OVERVIEW OF THE
PROPOSED LEGISLATION.
SO, HERE IS A SUMMARY OF WHAT
IS CONTAINED IN THE
LEGISLATION.
THE PROPOSAL WOULD INCREASE IS
MAXIMUM SIZE OF USE LIMIT FOR
INDOOR SPORTS AND RECREATIONAL
USES IN INDUSTRIAL GENERAL
ZONES FROM A CURRENT 10,000
SQUARE FEET MAXIMUM TO A 50,000
SQUARE FOOT MAXIMUM.
LEGISLATION INCLUDES SEVERAL
LIMITING CRITERIA THAT ARE
INTENDED TO MINIMIZE ANY
POTENTIAL ADVERSE IMPACT ON OUR
MANUFACTURING AND INDUSTRIAL
CENTERS.
SO THOSE CRITERIA ARE AS
FOLLOWS.
IT WOULD HAVE TO BE LOCATED IN
THE BALLARD INNER BAY NORTH END
MANUFACTURED INDUSTRIAL CENTER.
THE FACILITY WOULD HAVE TO BE
WITHIN 300 FEET OF AN EXISTING
NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL OR
SEATTLE MIX ZONE SO THAT
TARGETS, POTENTIAL LOCATIONS TO
THE EMS OF INDUSTRIAL AREAS
NEAR MIXED USE NEIGHBORHOODS
THE FACILITY COULD HAVE TO BE
WITHIN A QUARTER MILE OF A
SEATTLE PARK WITH ACTIVE
REACTION USE, SO THIS IS
INTENDED TO CREATE FUNCTIONAL
CLUSTERS OF RECREATIONAL
FACILITIES.
THE FACILITY COULD NOT BE
WITHIN 500 FEET OF A SHORELINE
AND THAT IS TO PRESERVE
SHORELINE AREAS FOR MARITIME
USES WHICH ARE PRIORITIZED.
AND A NEW FACILITY COULD NOT BE
WITHIN ONE MILE OF ANOTHER
INDOOR SPORTS AND RECREATION
FACILITY LARGER THAN 25 FEET SO
THIS WOULD PREVENT
PROLIFERATION OF TOO MANY
FACILITIES IN ONE AREA.
THE LEGISLATION WOULD ALSO
DECREASE THE AMOUNT OF REQUIRED
PARKING FROM ONE SPACE PER 500
SQUARE FEET TO ONE SPACE PER
2,000 SQUARE FEET.
THIS IS INTENDED TO MINIMIZE
THE AMOUNT OF EXPANSIVE SURFACE
PARKING THAT WOULD BE
ASSOCIATED WITH THE FACILITY.
THE BENEFITS OF THE PROPOSAL AS
IT HAS BEEN DISCUSSED CREATES
POTENTIAL NEW RECREATIONAL AND
TRAINING OPPORTUNITIES FOR
ATHLETICS AND CAMPS.
THE LIMITING CRITERIA MINIMIZE
IMPACTS ON NEARBY INDUSTRIAL
ACTIVITIES AND AS WAS
MENTIONED, INDOOR SPORTS AND
REACTION CAN BE COMPATIBLE WITH
A INDUSTRIAL CONTEXT COMPARED
TO MANY OTHER POTENTIAL USES.
THIS IS THE MAP THAT SHOWS HOW
LIMITED THE POTENTIAL AREAS
ARE.
THE GRAY SHADE ON THIS MAP,
PLEASE NOTE THAT NORTH IS TO
THE RIGHT OF YOUR SCREEN, ARE
THE INDUSTRIAL GENERAL ZONES
AND THE HATCHED AREAS ARE THE
SHORELINE BUFFERS WHERE A
FACILITY COULD NOT BE LOCATED.
THE GREEN INDICATES PARKS THAT
HAVE ACTIVE RECREATIONAL USES,
AND THE LAST, THE BLUE WITH THE
YELLOW OUTLINE SHOWS THE
REMAINING ELIGIBLE AREAS
ACCORDING TO OUR ANALYSIS.
AND WITH THAT I WILL CONCLUDE
THE PRESENTATION.
>> AM I CORRECT THAT THIS
PROPOSAL DOES NOT CHANGE OR ADD
NEW USING TO THE INDUSTRIAL
GENERAL 2, IS THAT CORRECT?
>> THAT IS CORRECT.
>> OKAY
>> IN THIS LEGISLATION,
LEGISLATION, SINCE YOU JUST
MENTIONED, IS NOT CHANGING
USES.
IT IS MY UNDERSTANDING THIS
LEGISLATION IS SIMPLY CHANGING
THE SIZE OF A USE THAT IS
ALREADY ALLOWED, IS THAT
CORRECT?
>> THAT IS ALSO CORRECT R. IT
INCREASES FROM 10,000 TO
50,000.
>> OKAY.
AND WHEN I WAS READING THE
DIRECTOR'S REPORT, WAS I
CORRECT IN READ THAT THERE ARE
UP TO 4 PA PARCELS THAT COULD
BE AFFECTED BY THIS CHANGE?
>> YES.
>> THOSE ARE MY QUESTIONS FOR
NOW.
COLLEAGUE, DO YOU HAVE
QUESTIONS?
>> MR. CHAIR?
COUNCILMEMBER JUAREZ?
>> THE OPC, MEMOS YOU PROVIDED,
FISCAL AND ALL THAT STUFF,
THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
DO YOU WANT US TO SPEAK TO THIS
NOW OR -- BECAUSE THAT IS WHAT
I AM WONDERING.
I DO WANT THE SPEAK TO THIS BUT
I AM WONDERING IF THE
PRESENTATION IS OVER, IF THIS
IS THE TIME YOU WANT US TO DO
IT, OR IF THIS IS JUST
QUESTIONS ABOUT THE POWERPOINT?
>> I WOULD SAY BOTH.
IF UP SOMETHING YOU WOULD LIKE
TO SAY, TAKE IT AWAY.
>> IT IS A LOT, BUT I WANT TO
MAKE SURE EVERYBODY HAS THEIR
SAY BE EVER I SAY ANYTHING
MORE, BEFORE WE GO TO A VOTE.
MR. CHAIR?
>> COPY.
WE WILL BE VOTING ON THIS ON
FRIDAY.
NOT TODAY, AS PER USUAL I LIKE
TO HAVE ITEMS
IN MY COMMITTEE AT LEAST TWICE
BEFORE VOTING, SO I THOUGHT
COUNCILMEMBER PEDERSEN, HE MAY
HAVE QUESTIONS AND THEN WE WILL
COME BACK TO YOU, COUNCILMEMBER
JUAREZ.
>> OKAY.
>> KIM MEMBER PEDERSEN, TAKE IT
AWAY.
>> THANK YOU AND THANK YOU FOR
GIVING US CHANCES TO CONSIDER
THE LEGISLATION TODAY WITH THE
PUBLIC HEARING, DISCUSSION AND
GIVING US TIME BETWEEN THAT TO
ACTUALLY VOTE ON IT.
AND I VERY MUCH -- I WANT TO
SUPPORT THE SEATTLE STORM.
I AGREE WITH SUE BIRD'S
COMMENTS ABOUT THE NEED TO LIFT
UP WOMEN'S SUPPORTS IN OUR
CITY FROM AN URBAN PLANNING
PERSPECTIVE THE LAND USE
LEGISLATION SEEMS TO BE
STRUCTURED WELL WITH THE
LIMITATIONS, SETBACKS AND OTHER
RESTRICTIONS.
I AM CONCERNED, THOUGH, ABOUT
THE ISSUES RAISED BY KEVIN ON
THE CITY COUNCIL BLOG INSIGHT.
I WANT TO MAKE SURE WHEN WE GET
TO FRIDAY, AT LEAST FOR MYSELF,
I WANT TO MAKE SURE WE ARE
DOING WHAT IS APPROPRIATE AND
NOT CREATING ANY RISKS TO THE
CITY, UNDUE RISKS TO THE CITY.
I WILL BE CULTING WITH THE CITY
ATTORNEY'S OFFICE BETWEEN NOW
AND THEN.
I REALLY APPRECIATE YOUR TAME
TO DOUBLE CHECK A COUPLE OF
THINGS.
SO, THAT IS -- I GUESS THE
QUESTION FOR CENTRAL STAFF,
THANK YOU FOR THE MEMO.
IT WAS VERY HELPFUL IT DOESN'T
MENTION THE SEATTLE STORM SO I
AM TRYING TO RECONCILE IS THIS
ABOUT THE SEATTLE STORM OR IS
IT JUST PROVIDING A GENERAL
CHANGE TO THE CODE?
>> SO, AS YOU HEARD IN
TESTIMONY, THE IDEA WAS RAISED
BY THE SEATTLE STORM BY THE
PROVISIONS OF THE BILL WOULD
APPLY TO MULTIPLE SITES
INCLUDING MANY PROPERTIES NOT
OWNED BY THE STORM.
>> THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU COUNCILMEMBER.
LIZ, CAN YOU CONFIRM, HAS THIS
BILL BEEN REVIEWED BY THE LAW
DEPARTMENT?
>> ALL LEGISLATION THAT COMES
TO COMMITTEE HAS BEEN REVIEWED
BY THE LAW DEPARTMENT, YES.
>> OKAY, GREAT.
THANK YOU.
COUNCILMEMBER JUAREZ.
>> I SHOULD ALSO ADD IT WITH US
ALSO REVIEWED BY ME.
SO THERE YOU GO, COUNCILMEMBER
PEDERSEN.
THANK YOU FOR YOUR GREAT MEMO
AND ANALYSIS.
WE HAVE BEEN WORKING ON THIS
LEGISLATION AND DISCUSSING
DIFFERENT PLACES.
I WANT TO DO DIFFERENT
BACKGROUND AND HISTORY.
THIS CONVERSATION DIDN'T JUST
POP UP.
I DON'T GET MY INFORMATION AND
MY ANALYSIS AND RESEARCH FROM
WRITERS, WHETHER IT IS KEVIN AT
THE TIMES, I DON'T DO THAT.
I DO MY OWN WORK.
SO LET ME ROLL BACK SOMETHING
QUICKLY AND I WILL HAVE MORE TO
SAY FRIDAY WHEN WE VOTE.
I WILL SAY THIS AGAIN.
MISS GUILDER DOES OWN THE
PROPERTY.
THIS IS PRIVATE PROPERTY.
WE KNOW THAT.
WHAT IS WRONG IF IT IS ABOUT
THE SEATTLE STORM?
WHEN WE DEAL WITH AND DEALT
WITH ANY OF OUR MAJOR SPORTS
TEAM, NOBODY EVER QUESTIONS IT.
THAT QUESTION NEVER COMES UP,
EVER.
BUT I WANT TO TAKE US BACK IN A
TIME MACHINE FOR A MOMENT FOR
YOU ALL TO THINK ABOUT THIS
WHEN WE VOTE ON FRIDAY.
THOSE OF US THAT WERE HERE IN
MAY OF 2016, THOSE OF US THAT
VOTED AGAINST A STREET VACATION,
COUNCILMEMBER IS A WANT,
HERBOLD, KIM MEMBER -- AND
MYSELF, WE BELIEVED TAX SHOULD
NOT BE TAKEN AWAY FROM THEM FOR
THE USE OF PRIVATE BENEFIT AND
WE DIDN'T THINK THE PUBLIC
BENEFIT WAS THAT GREAT.
IT WITH OUT STREET VACATION.
IT WOULD REQUIRE TAX PAYER
MONEY.
I COULD GO ON AND ON.
SO, WHEN PEOPLE KEEP BRINGING
UP THAT SITUATION THAT HAPPENED
IN 2016, THAT IS NOT WHAT WE
ARE DEALING WITH TODAY.
WE ARE DEALING WITH A GROUP OF
PEOPLE THAT ALREADY TONE
PROPERTY TO EXPAND A FOOTPRINT
FOR A USE THAT IS ALREADY
CONSISTENT.
WITH ARE NOT TALKING ABOUT
THOUSANDS OF PEOPLE COMING IN
TO WATCH A SPECTATOR SPORT.
IT IS A TRAINING FACILITY FOR A
TEAM WHICH WE DIDN'T HAVE IN
2016 THAT HAS WON FOUR INITIAL
CHAMPIONSHIPS.
YOU ALL KNOW THAT, I WILL GO
INTO THAT.
THERE IS A DIFFERENCE BETWEEN
SHOVEL READY, WHICH WAS SAID?
2016, WHICH IS NOT TRUE, AND
SHOVEL HUNGRY, AND WHAT WE HAVE
HERE IS SHOVEL READY.
I DON'T WANT TO SPEND TOO MUCH
TIME BELABORING YES, IT IS
IMPORTANT WE SUPPORT WOMEN'S
SPORTS AND ALL THOSE ISSUE, OF
COURSE.
WE WILL HEAR FROM PROBABLY MORE
PEOPLE ON FRIDAY.
THIS WASN'T SOME NEFARIOUS DEAL
BEHIND CLOSED-DOORS.
I WOULD LEEK THE KNOW WHERE
THESE BACK DOOR ROOMS ARE,
WHERE THERE ARE CIGARS BEING
SMOKED, BECAUSE I HAVEN'T BEEN
THERE.
IT HAS BEEN PRETTY
STRAIGHTFORWARD.
WE HAVE WORKED REALLY WELL WITH
OUR LABOR BROTHERS AND SISTERS,
WITH OUR FRIENDS AT THE PORT,
WITH OUR MARITIME FRIEND, WITH
STAKEHOLDERS.
I ALSO SIT ON SOUND TRANSIT SO
I UNDERSTAND WHAT SOME OF THEIR
CONCERNS WERE ABOUT POTENTIAL
ISSUES WITH LIGHTRAIL, WHICH
WOULD BE 16 YEARS FROM NOW.
WE KNOW THAT THERE ARE
THOUSANDS OF PARCELS THAT SOUND
TRANSIT HAS TO LOOK AT TO MAKE
ANYTHING HAPPEN WITH EMINENT
DOMAIN, SO WE JUST DON'T KNOW.
WE ARE AT 10% DESIGN THERE.
I DON'T WANT GO DOWN THAT
RABBIT HOLE.
THERE IS MORE INFORMATION, IT
IS ALL ON THE RECORD, IF PEOPLE
ASK FOR IT, I AM ONE OF THOSE
PEOPLE THAT IF YOU ASK FOR IT,
I WILL GIVE IT TO YOU.
YOU DON'T NEED TO PDR ME TO
DEATH.
I HAVE NOTHING TO HIDE.
I WANT TO SAY ONE LAST THING.
I REALLY LIKE -- I DON'T KNOW
WHO THIS GENTLEMEN WAS, BUT
WHAT HE SAID ABOUT -- WHEN WE
LOOK AT OUR DIFFERENT DISTRICTS
AND LOOK AT WHAT ECONOMIC
VITALITY IS AND PARTICULAR
BUILDINGS, IT ISN'T JUST BRICK
AND MORTAR.
IT IS A SENSE OF PLACE, IT IS
ABOUT WHAT IT BRINGS.
HAVING LIGHTRAIL, HAVING OUR
JOHN LEWIS BRIDGE, ALL THAT
MANY COMING TOGETHER DOES MORE
THAN JUST, YOU KNOW, PROVIDE
TRANSPORTATION A PLACE TO WATCH
THE KRAKEN PRACTICE OR PUS ON
ICE SKATES.
IT BRING AS SENSE OF PLACE.
IT ACTIVATES A COMMUNITY, IT
HAD US THAT LIFTING THAT WE
NEED.
I DON'T THINK ANYONE HERE TODAY
OR ANYONE WATCHING CANNOT SAY
THAT THE STORM HAS NOT LIFTED
US, THAT THEY HAVE NOT
REPRESENTED US, THAT THEY HAD
NOT BEEN THERE FOR US, SO I
DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM SAYING OR
QUESTIONING WHY CAN'T IT BE FOR
THE SEATTLE STORM, BECAUSE WE
SURE AS HELL TRIED TO DO IT IN
2016 WHEN WE DIDN'T EVEN HAVE A
TEAM AND WE WEREN'T EVEN IN THE
FRANCHISE OR THE RUNNING AND
THIS CITY WENT CRAZY FOR A TEAM
THAT LEFT THEM 14 YEARS AGO,
WHEN WE HAVE A TEAM HERE NOW
THAT HAS WON FOUR NATIONAL
CHAMPIONSHIPS.
NOW, I KNOW I WILL PROBABLY GET
A LOT OF HATE MAIL LIKE I GOT
LAST TIME.
BRING THE DEATH THREATS.
THAT BEING SAID, BEING A LAWYER
MYSELF, AND I WILL SAY THIS
BOLDLY AND BLUNTLY, IT IS NOT A
SPOT ZONE, SO HAVE FUN WITH
THAT.
AND I WILL JUST LEAVE IT AT
THAT AND HOPEFULLY WE CAN GO TO
A VOTE TODAY AND GET THIS OVER
WITH, BUT IF WE NEED TO GO TO
FRIDAY, THAT IS FINE, TOO.
I WILL ENCOURAGE THOSE OF YOU
THAT WANT TO STEP UP AND
SUPPORT NOT JUST THE SEATTLE
STORM, BUT REALLY WOMEN'S
SPORTS AND
DOING THAT.
BECAUSE WE DON'T DO THAT AND
SHOULD DO THAT AND SHAME ON US
FOR NOT DOING THAT.
AND I WILL LEAVE IT AT THAT.
THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU COUNCILMEMBER
JUAREZ.
THE PARCELS THAT JEFF SHARED ON
THE MAN, POTENTIAL 45 PARCELS
IN LOOKED LIKE THREE DIFFERENT
ZONE, THOSE ZONES ARE IN
DISTRICT 6 AND IN DISTRICT 7.
COUNCILMEMBER LEWIS, THE
DISTRICT COUNCILMEMBER FROM
DISTRICT 7 IS A MEMBER OF THIS
COMMITTEE.
COUNCILMEMBER LEWIS, TAKE IT
BOY.
>> THANK YOU COUNCILMEMBER
STRAUSS.
UNFORTUNATELY I AM ON MY PHONE
TODAY, BUT DEFINITELY HAPPY TO
BE HEARD OUT ON THIS.
YOU KNOW, I -- I FIRST WANTED
TO SAY AT THE TOP, I AM A VERY
BIG SUPPORTER OF THIS CHANGE
AND I DON'T WANT TO GET INTO
RESPONDING TO, AND LITIGATING
ANY OF THE ARMCHAIR LAWYERING
THAT MAY HAVE BEEN OUT IN THE
WORLD ON THIS.
YOU KNOW, I ACTUALLY CONCUR
WITH COUNCILMEMBER JUAREZ'S
ASSESSMENT THAT THIS IS NOT A
SPOT ZONE AND I WOULD STAND BY
THAT, AS WELL, AND TOTALLY
AGREE.
BUT I WOULD RATHER PIVOT THIS
AND TALK, SINCE I DO REPRESENT
DISTRICT 7, MORE ABOUT THE
UNIQUE ECOSYSTEM OF THE
BUSINESS COMMUNITY THAT IS
NORTH OF DRAVIS, EAST OF THE
RAILWAY GRADE, AND WEST OF 15th
AVENUE.
THE LITTLE SLICE OF INNER BAY
THAT WE ARE DISCUSSING ABOUT,
BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, TO AGREE
WITH COUNCILMEMBER JUAREZ,
AGAIN, YOU KNOW, THIS ISN'T
JUST ABOUT THE STORM, BUT IF
FOLKS ARE GOING TO MAKE IT
ABOUT THE STORM, LET'S PUT THAT
FRONT AN CENTER AND TALK NOT
JUST ABOUT THE BIG CIVIC
CONTRIBUTIONS THE STORM MAKES
TO OUR CITY, BUT THE
CONTRIBUTIONS THAT THE STORM'S
PLANS FOR A PARCEL IN THIS
ANYBODY, THIS NEARBY WILL DO
FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
I THINK IT IS IMPORTANT WHEN WE
TALK ABOUT INDUSTRIAL LAND,
COUNCILMEMBER, LIKE YOU WHO
GREW UP IN BALLARD, IN A
BALLARD VERY MUCH DOMINATED BY
THE MARITIME INDUSTRIAL
COMMUNITY AND KNOW THAT THE
COMMUNITY BUILDS STRONG
FAMILIES, THAT THAT COMMUNITY
PROVIDE GOODS JOB, THAT IT
PROVIDES UPWARD MOBILITY, THAT
IT PROVIDES OPPORTUNITY, THAT
IT PRODUCES ONE OF THE BIGGEST
FISHING FLEET, THAT WE DO WANT
TO HANG ON TO THAT CRITICAL
INDUSTRIAL CORE BECAUSE ONCE WE
LOSE IT IT ISN'T COMING BACK.
SO WHEN WE LOOK AT DOING THINGS
IN PLACES THAT ARE HISTORICALLY
DESIGNATED MARITIME INDUSTRIAL
USE, THAT IT BE HEIGHTENED TO A
LEVEL OF SCRUTINY.
LET'S TALK A LITTLE ABOUT THE
ELEPHANT IN THE ROOM, AND TALK
ABOUT WHAT IT WILL DO TO CHANGE
THE ACTIVATION TO THAT SITE IN
THIS NEIGHBORHOOD.
WE ARE NOT DISPLACING ANY
CURRENT INDUSTRIAL USE.
THIS IS NOT A SITE THAT IS A
SHIPYARD.
THIS IS NOT A SITE EMPLOYEES
MARITIME JOBS.
NO MARITIME JOBS WILL BE LOST
WITH THE SEATTLE STORM PUTTING
A PRACTICE FACILITY ON THE
SITE.
THIS SITE IS A SINGLE STORAGE
YARD WITH A BUNCH OF OLD RVs
AND BOATS, PLEASURE BOATS FOR
THE MOST MART, NOT BOATS OF
INDUSTRY, THAT FOR DECADES HAS
EITHER BEEN THAT OR A
COMPLETELY VACANT LOT,
UNACTIVATED, NO INTEREST IN THE
TENANT TAKING ON THE SITE.
IF WE ARE TALKING ABOUT
CREATING THE DYNAMIC NAKED AND
COMMUNITIES THAT COUNCILMEMBER
JUAREZ JUST ALLUDED TO, WE NEED
TO BE CREATIVE IN LOOKING AT
WAYS FOR OUR CODE TO TAKE
ADVANTAGE OF AND BE ADAPTIVE TO
BRING IN LEGACY TENANTS THAT
WILL UNDENIABLE MAKE A BIG
CONTRIBUTION TO NEIGHBORHOODS
LIKE THIS STORM PRACTICE
FACILITY.
THIS NEIGHBORHOOD THAT IS
SEEING AN INCREDIBLY LARGE
AMOUNT OF CHANGE.
I DON'T KNOW IF ANYBODY HAS
BEEN BY THE INTERSECTION OF
15th AND DRAVIS, BUT THERE IS A
SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF CLUSTERS
OF NEW APARTMENT BUILDINGS.
THE DISTRICT HAS SURVIVED FOR
MANY DECADES WITH A NUMBER OF
BUSINESSES THAT CATER THE
SURROUNDING NEIGHBORHOOD, NOT
JUST FOR MARITIME INDUSTRIAL
PURPOSE, BUT FOR BASIC RETAIL,
GROCERY AND RESTAURANTS.
IT IS FRANKLY NOT THE BEST USE
FOR THIS BUSINESS DISTRICT TO
HAVE A STATIC STORAGE YARD
SITTING THERE NOT CONTRIBUTING
IN A BROAD SENSE TO THE
ACTIVATION OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD,
NOT CONTRIBUTING TO THE DENSITY
OF JOB OPPORTUNITY, NOT
CONTRIBUTING TO THIS ENTITY OF
PEDESTRIAN TRAFFIC IN A
BUSINESS DISTRICT, FRANKLY NOT
CONTRIBUTING TO THECEPS OF
PUBLIC SAFETY BY HAVING ANOTHER
ACTIVATION WITH EYES ON THE
STREET FOR POTENTIAL
CRIMINALIZED ACTIVITY IN THE
NEIGHBORHOOD.
WE KNOW PEOPLE THAT LIVE OR
WORK IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD ARE
INFORMAL GUARDIAN OS PLACE AND
PROVIDE AN ACTIVATION.
SO I THINK WE ARE LOOKING AT
WHAT THIS IS GOING TO DO FOR
THE ECOSYSTEM THAT IS, AGAIN,
NORTH OF DRAVIS, WEST OF 15th ,
EAST OF THE RAILWAY GRADE.
THIS IS UNDENIABLY GOING TO
FORM A HUB RIGHT AT THE CENTER
OF IT THAT WILL HAVE AN
EXTREMELY POSITIVE IMPACT ON
SUPPORTING, CATERING TO, AND
REINFORCING THE EXISTING
BUSINESSES AND EXISTING
ECOSYSTEM.
I WOULD ALSO SAY IN TERMS OF
GOING BACK TO THE LEGISLATION
MORE BROADLY AND NOT FOCUS
ONGOING THE SPECIFIC SITE THAT
HAS BEEN A MATTER OF PUBLIC
CONTENTION, THAT THERE ARE SAFE
GUARDS THAT PROTECT THE MOST
CRITICAL OF OUR INDUSTRIAL
LANDS, WHICH ARE THE SHORING
LINE WITH INDUSTRIAL SPACES.
I DO AGREE, LIKE THAT HAS TO BE
A BRIGHT RED LINE IN THE SAND
ON MAKINGSURE THAT WE NEVER
GIVE UP AS A CITY ANYMORE OF
OUR SHORELINE INDUSTRIAL SPACE,
ANY OF OUR SHIPYARDS, ANY OF
OUR PLACES, THE FISHERMAN'S
TERMINAL.
ONCE THOSE PROPERTY ON THE
WATER ARE GONE AND GO TO A
COMMERCIAL OR R. USE WE NEVER
GET IT BACK, BUT THAT IS NOT
WHAT WE ARE TALKING ABOUT HERE.
TO REINFORCE THAT VALUE THERE
IS A RULE IN THE LEGISLATION
THAT WE JUST HEARD IN THE
BRIEFING.
500 FEET AWAY FROM A SHORELINE
IN OR TO MAINTAIN AND REINFORCE
THAT VALUE.
I THINK THE LEGISLATION WILL
HAVE A POSITIVE IMPACT ON MY
DISTRICT, A POSITIVE IMPACT ON
INNER BAY, AND IT IS GOING TO
ENHANCE THESE MARITIME BUSINESS
DISTRICT, NOT UNDERMINE THERE.
I AM TOTALLY HAPPY TO DEFER,
VOTE ON THIS, DISCUSS IT AGAIN
ON FRIDAY.
TOTALLY HAPPY TO M█AKE SPACE FO
OTHER COMMITTEE MEMBERS TO
RECEIVE PROFESSIONAL LEGAL
ADVICE FROM THE CITY ATTORNEY'S
OFFICE, BUT ON FRIDAY I DO
INTEND TO VOTE FOR THIS
LEGISLATION.
I CERTAINLY APPRECIATE THE
COMMUNITY MEMBER WHO IS HAVE
COME FORWARD AND SPOKEN UP FOR
THIS UNIQUE ACTIVATION IN THE
INNER BAY NEIGHBORHOOD AND LOOK
FORWARD TO SUPPORTING THIS, SO
THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU COUNCILMEMBER
LEWIS, AND JUAREZ FOR YOUR
PREVIOUS COMMENTS AND
QUESTIONS.
I JUST WANT TO HIGHLIGHT AND
RAISE UP A FEW THINGS THAT I
HEARD TODAY.
I HEARD FROM SUE BIRD THE
LANDSCAPE OF WMBA CHANGED IN
TERMS OF PRACTICE FACILITIES.
THEY WERE NOT A BIG DEAL BEFORE
AND ARE A VERY BIG DEAL NOW.
IN THE LAST FEW YEARS WE NEED
TO MAKE SURE THAT ON SUNDAY
WHEN SUE AND THE ENTIRE TEAM IS
REPRESENTING SEATTLE IN THE
PLAY-OFFS FOR THE WMBA
REPRESENTING SEATTLE AS A FOUR-
TIME CHAMPION WINNER, THAT OUR
TEAMMATES HAVE THEIR MINDS
FOCUSED ON THE GAME AND NOT
THINKING ABOUT WHAT WILL HAPPEN
AFTER THE PLAY-OFF SEASON, NOT
THINKING ABOUT WHAT WILL HAPPEN
NEXT YEAR, BECAUSE THEY KNOW
THAT SEATTLE HAS GOT THEIR
BACK.
THAT IS A VERY IMPORTANT THING
THAT WE NEED TO MAKE SURE.
AS COUNCILMEMBER JUAREZ STATED,
WE WERE ABOUT TO BEND OVER
BACKWARD FOR A TEAM THAT LEFT
US AND WAS NOT PRESENT.
WE HAVE A FOUR-TIME WINNING
CHAMPIONSHIP TEAM HERE.
AND I LOOK FORWARD TO
SUPPORTING OUR TEAM SO THAT
THEY CAN HAVE THEIR MIND ON THE
GAME AND WIN US SOME PLAY-OFF
GAMES, SO, THAT IS HOW I AM
FEELING THIS MORNING.
COLLEAGUES, ANY OTHER QUESTIONS?
ADRIENNE, JEFF, DIRECTOR AARON
DON DOE, ANY OTHER COMMENTS YOU
WANT TO SHARE TODAY?
>> NOTHING MORE FROM ME.
LOOKING FORWARD TO THE VOTE ON
FRIDAY.
>> THANK YOU.
AGAIN, THANK YOU FOR THE
SUGGESTION TODAY OF THE
LEGISLATION WILL BE BACK BEFORE
THE COMMITTEE ON FRIDAY
AFTERNOON FOR A POSSIBLE VOTE.
OUR NEXT ITEM MAKES ANNUAL
AMENDMENTS TO THE COMPREHENSIVE
PLAN.
WILL YOU PLEASE READ THE
ABBREVIATED TITLE INTO THE
RECORD.
>> MICHAEL, IF YOU WOULD LIKE
TO INTRODUCE YOURSELF.
>> MY NAME IS MICHAEL
HURRICANES UBNER WITH THE
OFFICE OF PLANNING AND
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT.
>> THANK YOU.
WE STILL HAVE DIRECTOR AARON
DON DOE WITH US.
>> LET ME SHARE MY SCREEN.
LET ME KNOW WHEN YOU SEE THE
PRESENTATION.
>> WE HAVE IT UP.
>> GREAT.
.
>> THE ZONING AS A BILL IS
PROBABLE AT SOME POINT IN THE
FUTURE THAT THE PROJECT
PROPONENT WILL FILE FOR A
CONTRACT REZONE.
NEXT SLIDE IS A FUTURE LAND USE
MAP AMENDMENT, APPROXIMATELY
8.4-ACRES OF LAND DIRECTLY
ACROSS THE STREET FROM THE
FUTURE 130th STREET STATION.
>> YES!
IT REPRESENTS EARLY
IMPLEMENTATION ACTION OF A
BROADER STATIONARY AND PLANNING
PROCESS UNDER WAY.
IT IS INFORMED BY THE
COMMUNITY'S VISION FOR THE
FUTURE OF THE AREA.
THIS AS CAPTURED IN THE DRAFT
PLAN WE RELEASED IN MARCH.
IT DEMONSTRATES AN EARLY
COMMITMENT BY THE CITY TO
TRANSIT ORIENT DEVELOPMENT OF
THE 2025 OPENING OF THE STATION
AND AS I SAID, THERE IS
ADDITIONAL PLANNING UNDER WAY
FOR POTENTIALLY BROADER
CHANGES.
THE GRAY AREA IS THE STATION
AREA WE HAVE BEEN FOCUSING ON,
BUT THE PLANNING EFFORT
ACTUALLY COVERS THIS BROADER
YELLOW AREA.
THAT PROCESS SHOULD BE COMPLETE
IN THE NEXT YEAR TO TWO YEARS,
AND ADDITIONAL RECOMMENDATIONS
WILL COME AT THAT TIME.
WE HAD PLANNED TO INTRODUCE
SOME AMENDMENTS RELATED TO THE
MARITIME STRATEGY BUT WE WILL
WAIT UNTIL NEXT YEAR.
WE ARE CURRENTLY IN THE MIDDLE
OF AN EIS AND IT WILL BE A SET
OF PROPOSED LAND USE POLICY
AMENDMENTS THAT WILL HAPPEN
WHEN THE CHANGE IS COMPLETE
INCLUDING CHANGES TO THE NEW
INDUSTRIAL LAND BASED ON ZONING
CONCEPTS, THE MARITIME CORE
INDUSTRIAL ZONE LOGISTIC,
INDUSTRY DENSITY AROUND FUTURE
TRANSIT STATIONS AND URBAN
INDUSTRIAL TO PROVIDE A BETTER
TRANSITION BETWEEN CORE
INDUSTRIAL AREA AND NON-
INDUSTRIAL AREAS.
IT WOULD BE A RECOMMENDATION
FOR A POLICY THAT LIMITS FUTURE
AMENDMENTS THAT CHANGE THE
BOUNDARIES TO INCLUDE MAJOR
UPDATES ON THE COMPREHENSIVE
PLAN OR FOLLOWING THE STUDY OF
INDUSTRIAL LANDS AND, FINALLY,
WE ANTICIPATE RECOMMENDING A
POLICY THAT ESTABLISHES THE
CITY'S INTENT TO PARTNER WITH
THE STATE OF WASHINGTON IN A
MASTER PLANNING PROCESS FOR ANY
FUTURE REDEVELOPMENT OF THE
INTERBAY ARMORY OR THE WASKA
SITE.
>> JIM, CAN YOU CONFIRM THAT
SINCE WE ARE UNABLE TO MOVE
THIS SECTION FORWARD AT THIS
TIME DUE TO SECRET PROCESSING
ISSUES, CAN YOU CONFIRM WE WILL
BE BRINGING IN AN AMENDMENT
FORWARD ON FRIDAY TO REMOVE
THIS SECTION OF THIS ORDINANCE?
>>
THAT IS MY UNDERSTANDING.
>> OKAY, THANK YOU.
>> AND OUR FINAL SLIDES, OTHER
DOCUMENT PROPOSALS.
WE HAVE A PROPOSAL TO LOOK AT
EARLIER PROPOSED AMENDMENTS
RELATING TO TREE PROTECTION
CANOPY, AS WELL AS PERHAPS
CASTING A BROADER LOOK AT THE
FORESTRY COMMISSION AND OSE
AROUND LOOKING AT POTENTIAL
POLICIES FOR TREATMENT OF THE
CANOPY PRESERVATION.
THAT IS BEING DEFERRED TO THE
MAINLY UPDATE.
FOSSIL FUELS AND HUMAN HEALTH
IS ALSO BEING DEFERRED
TO THE 2024 MAJOR UP DAY TIME.
EVALUATING THE APPROPRIATENESS
OF THE SOUTH PARK URBAN VILLAGE
ODESSA NATION WILL ALSO BE
CONSIDERED AS A MAJOR UPDATE.
AS YOU KNOW, TRIGGERED FOR
SINGLE FAMILY ZONES AND THE
COUNCIL IS PURSUING THAT.
AND AMENDMENTS TO SUPPORT
TRANSPORTATION IMPACT FEES IS
ALSO AN ITEM THAT COUNCIL IS
PURSUING.
AND THAT CONCLUDES OUR
PRESENTATION.
>> THANK YOU, JIM.
I HAVE ONE QUESTION ABOUT
130th, IF YOU CAN SLIDE BACK TO
THAT SLIDE.
>> I HAVE TO GO BACK IN MY
NEIGHBORHOOD, COUNCILMEMBER.
>> BECAUSE I AM SO EXCITED
ABOUT IT!
>> I APOLOGIZE.
I DIDN'T REALIZE MY MUTE BUTTON
WAS OFF LAST TIME.
I APOLOGIZE.
>> THAT IS GOOD
>> I WAS MOSTLY INTERESTED IN
THE TIMELINE.
THERE IS AN INTERESTING -- ON
THE MAP IT DEMONSTRATES THE
NEED FOR A -- IN THAT AREA JUST
BY THE STREET GRADE, I WAS
GOING TO POINT IT OUT, BUT IF
YOU ARE NOT ABLE TO CYCLE BACK,
IT IS TOTALLY OKAY.
>> ISN'T THAT SLIDE 6?
>> IT IS.
>> I HIGHLIGHTED THE SLIDE JUST
SO YOU KNOW.
>> IT IS OKAY.
JIM, DO YOU HAVE A TIMELINE ON
THAT?
>> THAT WORK IS UNDER WAY.
PETRICE, CAN YOU SPEAK TO THE
TIMELINE ON THE EFFORT?
>> THIS IS PETRICE CARROLL.
I HAVE BEEN WORKING ON THIS
PROJECT.
RIGHT NOW WE ARE LOOKING AT TWO
TIMELINES.
ONE TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THE
LEGISLATION AS A SEPARATE
ACTION AND TO BE COMPLETE IN
2022, OR THE OTHER TO BE
COMPLETED IN 2023.
THE OTHER WOULD BE TO ALIGN IT
WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
MAJOR UPDATE AND THE ACTION
WOULD BE COMPLETED BY 2024.
>> GREAT, THANK YOU.
>> IF ANYONE IS LOOKING AT THE
MAP IT IS INTERESTING TO SEE
THAT ROOSEVELT WAY BEGINS AT
THE CITY BORDER AT 145th AND
AURORA AND THERE IS A DIAGONAL
TO THAT INTERSECTION OF 130th
. IT IS INTERESTING TO SEE HOW
THE FREEWAY DISCONNECTED THE
NEIGHBORHOOD IN THAT REAL
PHYSICAL WAY THAT WE CAN NO
LONGER USE ROOSEVELT WAY AS IT
WAS ONCE CONNECTED.
ONE EXAMPLE OF MANY OF WHY WE
NEED TO RECONNECT OUR
NEIGHBORHOODS BY -- OUR
FREEWAYS.
COUNCILMEMBER PEDERSEN, TAKE IT
AWAY.
>> THANK YOU, CHAIR STRAUSS.
I WANTED TO ADDRESS ONE OF THE
ITEMS IN MY DISTRICT, DISTRICT
FOUR IF WITH ARE ABLE TO GO
BACK TO THE SLIDE TO SHOW THE
HALF BLOCKED.
I WANT TO THANK THE OFFICER FOR
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT TO ALERT
US TO THIS PROPOSAL WITH PLENTY
OF TIME TO CONSIDER IT.
SOME NEARBY RESIDENTS AND
COMMUNITY LEADERS RAISED
CONCERNS ABOUT IT.
I WANT TO EXPLAIN BRIEFLY WHY I
WILL BE SUPPORTING THIS
PARTICULAR UP ZONE.
THIS AREA IS JUST 25% OF THE
WHOLE BLOCK.
IT IS ALREADY MULTIFAMILY
HOUSING AND ATTACHED TO THE
EXISTING BOUNDARY OF THE URBAN
CENTER AT THE INTERSECTION OF
TWO ARTERIALS.
>> COUNCILMEMBER JUAREZ?
>> PATRICIA MICHAEL, YOU HAVE
BEEN WORKING.
I KNOW PCD, SOUND TRANSIT AND
FOR US TO GET TO 30th STREET
LIGHTRAIL TO GET BACK ON THE
BOARD AGAIN, WE ARE BACK IN THE
GAME AGAIN.
>> Translator: AGAIN.
[ CAPTIONERS CAPTIONERS
TRANSITIONING ]
BIG THANK YOU TO YOU, BECAUSE
YOU'VE BEEN UP THERE, AND I
KNOW WE'VE BEEN DEALING AND
WORKING ON THIS SINCE THE DAY I
GOT ELECTED, AND CERTAINLY WAS
AN ISSUE BACK IN 2015, AND TO
ALL THOSE COMMUNITY GROUPS UP
NORTH, PARTICULARLY RENEE
STANTON AND THOSE FOLKS.
WE HAVE A COMMUNITY THAT WILL
CONTINUE TO BE INVOLVED.
I'M NOT ONE TO GO ON AND ON,
AND SAY THANK YOU TO EVERYONE
AND GOD, BUT I DO WANT TO THANK
YOU FOR YOUR HARD WORK.
SOMETIMES I'VE BEEN A PEST.
AND LISH, AND ERIC, THANK YOU
FOR THE WORK YOU'VE PROVIDED.
EXCELLENT ANALYSIS, AND I
APPRECIATE THAT.
>> VERY WELL SAID COUNCILMEMBER
JUAREZ.
YOU CAN SEE HOW ROOSEVELT WAY
IS DISCONNECTED FROM I-5 THERE.
NO NEED TO FURTHER BELABOR THE
POINT.
I HEARD COUNCILMEMBER LEWIS
DOES NOT HAVE QUESTIONS AT THIS
TIME.
SEEING NO FURTHER QUESTIONS, I
WILL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING
UNLESS LISH, ERIC, MICHAEL, OR
JIM HAVE ADDITIONAL, I'M SEEING
NO'S.
WE WILL NOW MOVE ONTO THE
PUBLIC HEARING.
BEFORE WE OPEN THE REMOTE
PUBLIC HEARING, I WOULD ASK
THAT EVERYONE PLEASE BE PATIENT
AS WE CONTINUE TO OPERATE THIS
NEW SYSTEM IN REALTIME, AND
NAVIGATE THROUGH THE INEVITABLE
GROWING PAINS.
WE'RE LOOKING FOR WAYS TO FINE
TUNE THIS.
I WLL MODERATE THE PUBLIC
HEARING IN THE FOLLOWING
MATTER.
EACH SPEAKER WILL BE GIVEN TWO
MINUTES TO SPEAK.
IF YOU HAVE NOT YET REGISTERED
TO SPEAK AND WOULD LIKE TO, YOU
CAN SIGN UP BEFORE THE END OF
THE PUBLIC HEARING BY GOING TO
THE COUNCIL'S WEBSITE.
A PROMPT OF YOU HAVE BEEN
UNMUTED WILL BE THE CUE THAT IT
YOUR TURN TO SPEAK.
AS A REMINDER, PUBLIC COMMENT
NEEDS TO RELATE TO COUNCIL BILL
102154 FOR THIS PUBLIC HEARING.
IF YOU HAVE COMMENT ABOUT
SOMETHING THAT IS NOT THIS
BILL, OR NOT ON TODAY'S AGENDA,
YOU CAN PROVIDE WRITTEN
COMMENTS BY EMAILING MY OFFICE,
OR BY SIGNING UP FOR THE
APPROPRIATE HEARING.
ONCE YOU HEAR THE CHIME, WE ASK
YOU TO BEGIN TO WRAP UP YOUR
PUBLIC COMMENT.
IF SPEAKERS DO NOT WRAP UP AT
THE ALLOTTED TIME, ONCE YOU
HAVE COMPLETED YOUR PUBLIC
COMMENT, WE ASK THAT YOU PLEASE
DISCONNECT FROM THE LINE, IF
YOU PLAN ON FOLLOWING ALONG
WITH THIS HEARINGS, WE ASK THAT
YOU DO SO ON THE PUBLIC
CHANNEL.
WE WILL BEGIN WITH THE FIRST
SPEAKER ON THE LIST.
I SEE TWO SPEAKERS SIGNED UP.
ONE IS NOT PRESENT.
KATIE KENDALL.
YOU ARE NOT PRESENT.
SO PLEASE DO CALL IN.
IT IS NOT A LISTEN LINE.
IT IS THE LINE MAYBE I.T.
IF YOU CAN CONFIRM, WHEN THEY
SIGN UP, THEY RECEIVE AN EMAIL,
ISTHAT CORRECT?
>> AFFIRMATIVE.
>> SO IF YOU HAVE SIGNED UP,
PLEASE READ THE EMAIL IN WHICH
YOU HAVE RECEIVED.
THE TWO SPEAKERS ARE DAVID
MAUREEN, AND KATIE KENDALL.
DAVID, GOOD MORNING.
GREAT TO HEAR YOU THIS MORNING.
>> THANK YOU.
50áEUDI'D LIKE TO JUST MAKE A
SMALL PITCH FOR THE COMPLAN FOR
THE CITY GOAL TO ACHIEVE THE
30% THROUGH CANOPY COVER BY THE
YEAR 2037, AND JUST BE MORE
DEFENSIVE IN TERMS OF HOW WE'LL
REACH THAT GOAL.
AS YOU KNOW, STREET TREATIES,
AND PUBLIC TREATIES ACCOMMODATE
LESS THAN ONE QUARTER OF THE
TREE CANOPY AND IF WE RELY ON
THAT, WE WILL BE FAR CHALLENGED
TO ACHIEVE OUR CANOPY GOAL.
WE BELIEVE THAT WE CAN HAVE
BOTH DENSITY AND TREE CANOPY
COVER.
SO DO CONSIDER IN YOUR
IMPROVE THE TREE CANOPY. N TO
THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
>> THANK YOU, DAVID.
UP NEXT, WE DO HAVE KATIE
KENDALL, WHO I SEE IS PRESENT.
GOOD MORNING, KATIE.
KATIE, I SEE YOU ARE OFF MUTE
ON OUR END.
THERE YOU ARE.
GOOD MORNING.
>> CAN YOU HEAR ME?
TECHNOLOGICAL DIFFICULTIES ON
MY END, BUT THANK YOU VERY
MUCH.
GOOD MORNING.
GO AHEAD.
>> SORRY.
WE JUST GOT THAT TIME STARTED A
LITTLE EARLY.
WE'LL RESET IT FOR YOU THERE.
TAKE IT AWAY, KATIE.
GOOD MORNING.
>> GOOD MORNING,
COUNCILMEMBERS.
MY NAME IS KATIE KENDALL, AND
I'M COMMENTING TODAY ON BEHALF
OF LAUREN BUTTIGEN.
HE HAS APPLIED FOR HIS PROPERTY
AT 516 AVENUE NORTHEAST, TO BE
INCLUDED IN THE UNIVERSITY
COMMUNITY URBAN CENTER, THIS IS
THE FIRST AMENDMENT IN COUNSEL
BILL 120154.
AS OUTLINED IN DETAIL IN THE
PRESENTATION TODAY, THIS
AMENDMENT MEETS MANY EXISTING
GOALS INCLUDING ESTABLISHING
BOUNDARIES FOR CENTERS IN
ADDITION WITH THIS BETTER
REFLECTED DIVERSE MIX HELPING
IS CURRENTLY PROVIDED ON THIS
BLOCK, IS THAT SOME OF THE
EXISTING BUILDINGS ON THIS
BLOCK ARE ALREADY LARGER THAN
THE EXISTING ZONING IS
CURRENTLY.
THE UPDATED DESIGNATION WOULD
SERVE THE PURPOSE OF INCREASING
TRANSIT ACCESSIBLE DEVELOPMENT.
GOALS THAT ARE FEATURED
PROMINENTLY, THE PLANNINGWIDE
COUNCIL POLICIES, WE ASK THAT
YOU AMEND THE PLUME TO EXTEND
THE URBAN CENTER BOUNDARY.
THANK YOU FOR YOUR
CONSIDERATION TODAY.
>> THANK YOU, KATIE.
I.T.
CAN YOU CONFIRM THERE ARE NO
ADDITIONAL PUBLIC COMMENT
REGISTRANTS FOR THIS BILL?
COUNCIL BILL 102-0154.
>> THERE ARE NO MORE PUBLIC
REGISTRANTS.
>> THANK YOU.
SEEING AS THAT WAS OUR LAST
SPEAKER REMOTELY PRESENT TO
SPEAK AT THIS PUBLIC HEARING ON
120154 IS NOW CLOSED.
THANK YOU TO EVERYONE WHO
PROVIDED COMMENT TODAY.
THIS LEGISLATION WILL BE BACK
BEFORE THE COMMITTEE THIS
FRIDAY FOR A POSSIBLE VOTE.
WE WILL MOVE ON.
NEXT IS 120155, WHICH WILL
CHANGE THE NAME OF SINGLE
FAMILY AREAS TO RESIDENTIAL
AREAS.
MR. HON, WOULD YOU READ THE
ABBREVIATED TITLE.
>> AMENDING THE COMPREHENSIVE
PLAN TO CHANGE THE NAME OF
SINGLE FAMILY AREAS TO
RESIDENTIAL AREAS IN THE 2021
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN PROCESS.
>> THANK YOU.
THIS IS PART TWO OF OUR ANNUAL
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT.
AFTER APPEARING IN 2019, 2020,
AND 2021, COUNCIL IS MOVING
THIS FORWARD AS AN AMNDMENT
THIS YEAR.
WE'VE CHOSEN THIS AS A SEPARATE
AMENDMENT, TO KEEP THIS
DISCUSSION SEPARATE FROM THE
MORE COMPLEX AMENDMENT BEING
CONSIDERED IN 120154.
THIS NAME CHANGE WAS
RECOMMENDED TO US BY THE
SEATTLE PLANNING COMMISSION,
AND IT REFLECTS THE REALITY ON
THE GROUND TODAY.
THEY INCLUDE HOUSEHOLDS WITH
MULTIPLE FAMILIES, AS WELL AS
LEGACY DUPLEXES, ROW HOUSES,
AND APARTMENT BUILDINGS BUILT
BEFORE THE CURRENT ZONING RULES
APPLY.
I'VE BEEN HAPPY TO COSPONSOR
THIS LEGISLATION WITH
COUNCILMEMBER MUSS MUSQUEDA.
LISH, WOULD YOU LIKE TO TAKE US
AWAY?
>> THANK YOU.
SO THIS SET OF AMENDMENTS IS
VERY SIMPLE, BUT IT TOUCHES A
LARGE NUMBER OF POLICIES AND
GOALS, AND DISCUSSION SECTIONS
IN THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.
IT AMENDS THE LAND USE ELEMENT,
PARKS AND OPEN SPACE ELEMENT,
THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP TO
CHANGE THE NAME OF SINGLE
FAMILY AREAS TO RESIDENTIAL
FAMILY AREAS.
THE INTENT IS TO BETTER REFLECT
THE MIX OF CHARACTER AND
ACTIVITIES THAT ARE CURRENTLY
FOUND IN WHAT ARE CALLED SINGLE
FAMILY AREAS BY INCLUDING A
MORE INCLUSIVE NAME.
YOU HAD A PUBLIC HEARING ON
THIS TO GET INITIAL FEEDBACK
FROM THE COMMUNITY AT THE END
OF JULY.
TODAY IS THE OFFICIAL PUBLIC
HEARING ON THE BILL.
AFTER THE ORIGINAL PUBLIC
HEARING, WE DID HEAR FROM ONE
NEIGHBORHOOD, THE MORGAN
COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION THAT HAS
REQUESTED AN AMENDMENT THAT'S
ATTACHED TO THE AGENDA, AND
THAT WOULD AFFECT THE MORGAN
JUNCTION NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN AND
THE NORTHGATE NEIGHBORHOOD
PLAN.
AND WITH THAT, I WILL BE
AVAILABLE FOR ANY QUESTIONS.
>> THANKS.
I HAVE A FEW.
THEN COLLEAGUES, IF YOU HAVE
QUESTIONS, WE'LL TAKE THAT.
I KNOW YOU SAID THIS.
I'M GOING TO ASK THESE
QUESTIONS TO LIFT UP WHAT
YOU'VE ALREADY SAID.
CAN YOU CONFIRM THIS AMENDMENT
DOES NOT CHANGE CITY POLICY ON
WHAT IS ALLOWED WITHIN THESE
ZONES, AND THAT IT ONLY CHANGES
THE NAME, IS THAT CORRECT?
>> CORRECT.
>> CAN YOU CONFIRM THAT THE
AMENDMENT LISTED ON THE AGENDA
IMPROVES THE READABILITY OF
SOME PLANS AND AGAIN, DOES NOT
MAKE ANY SUBSTANTIVE CHANGES,
IS THAT CORRECT?
>> CORRECT.
>> I UNDERSTAND IF THIS PASSES,
THE COUNCIL MAY WANT TO TAKE UP
FUTURE LEGISLATION TO REFLECT
THE NAME CHANGE THERE AS WELL.
CAN YOU ALSO CONFIRM THAT
UNDERSTANDING, THAT THE CHANGES
WOULD ONLY BE TO THE NAME, AND
AGAIN NOT TO ZONING POLICY.
>> CORRECT.
SO IF THIS BILL PASSES, THEN
COUNCIL WOULD CONSIDER A BILL
TO AMEND THE LINE USE CODE,
MAKING THE SAME CHANGES THROUGH
THE LAND USE CODE, BUT NOT
MAKING CHANGES TO POLICY.
>> THIS IS CHANGING THE NAME TO
REFLECT THE REALITY THAT WE ARE
DUPLEXES AND APARTMENT
BUILDINGS THAT ARE BUILT IN
WHAT IS NOW SINGLE FAMILY
ZONES, THAT WERE NOT
NECESSARILY PREVIOUS WHEN THEY
WERE BUILT.
SO WE ARE ENDEAVORING SO CHANGE
THE NAME ONLY, TO REFLECT THE
NEIGHBORHOODS THAT WE LIVE IN.
COLLEAGUES, ARE THERE ANY
QUESTIONS ON THIS BILL?
I SEE COUNCILMEMBER PETERSON,
PLEASE TAKE IT AWAY.
>> THANK YOU, CHAIR STRAUSS.
I DO NOT HAVE ANY QUESTIONS,
BUT I DO HAVE COMMENTS BECAUSE
I RECEIVED SOME LETTERS AND
EMAILS FROM COMMUNITY LEADERS
IN THE DISTRICT WHO HAD
CONCERNS ABOUT THIS, AND I
WANTED TO EXPLAIN WHY I'M
LIKELY TO SUPPORT THIS.
SO I DON'T HAVE THE QUESTIONS.
SHOULD I SAVE THOSE UNTIL
FRIDAY?
>> NO, PLEASE, EITHER OR.
YOUR PREFERENCE.
>> OKAY, THANK YOU.
SO YOU KNOW I REALLY APPRECIATE
WHAT OUR CENTRAL STAFF ANALYST
SAID AND THE CHAIRLIFTED UP.
THIS IS A NAME CHANGE FOR WHAT
IS ALREADY THE REALITY ON THE
GROUND IN THESE GEOGRAPHIC
AREAS.
I THINK THE REAL DISCUSSION
WOULD BE HAPPENING, THE
SUBSTANTIVE DISCUSSION WOULD BE
HAPPENING AT A LATER TIME.
THERE WON'T BE A ROBUST
DISCUSSION IN THE FUTURE FOR
ZONING, BUT I THINK WHAT
MATTERS TO ME MOST IN THAT
DISCUSSION AT LEAST NOW WOULD
BE IN THE FUTURE WOULD BE THAT
I GENERALLY DO NOT SUPPORT
BLANKET UP ZONES, UNLESS
THERE'S A CLEAR AND IMMEDIATE
PUBLIC PEN FIT, SUCH AS ON
SITE, VERY LOW INCOME HOUSING
THAT'S BUILT.
WHEN THERE'S ADDITIONAL
DENSITY, IT'S IDEALLY NEAR
FREQUENT TRANSIT, AND WHERE
THERE'S SUFFICIENT
INFRASTRUCTURE, SUCH AS SCHOOL
CAPACITY, AND THAT WE PUT
MITIGATIONS IN PLACE BEFORE THE
ACTUAL SUBSTANTIVE UPZONES
OCCUR.
SUCH AS MAKING SURE THAT WE
DON'T DEMOLISH EXISTING
NATIONALLY, OCCURRING
AFFORDABLE HOUSING.
WE'RE MINDFUL OF THE TREE
CANOPY AND GROW THAT.
I'M HOPING WE LEARNED FROM THE
MANDATORY HOUSING AND
AFFORDABILITY PROGRAM, WHICH
HAD A GOOD INTENTION, SOME
BENEFITS, BUT IN MY OPINION
SOME SHORTCOMINGS.
I JUST WANT TO LET FOLKS KNOW
WHO DID WRITE TO MY OFFICE WITH
CONCERNS, THAT I'M MINDFUL OF
THOSE CONCERNS, AND THAT
DISCUSSION WILL BE HAPPENING AT
A LATER TIME, AND THIS NAME
CHANGE, IT'S NOT SUBSTANTIVE AT
THIS TIME.
SO THANK YOU, CHAIR.
>> THANK YOU COUNCILMEMBER
PEDERSEN.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS?
>> COUNCILMEMBER LEWIS HERE.
I JUST WANT TO BRIEFLY ADDRESS
THIS LEGISLATION TOO.
I WILL BE VOTING IN FAVOR OF IT
TODAY.
SIMILAR TO COUNCILMEMBER
PEDERSEN, I HAVE HEARD A NUMBER
OF POTENTIAL CONCERNS ABOUT THE
IMPACT OF THIS NAME CHANGE.
AND YOU KNOW, I GUESS I JUST
WANT TO SPEAK GENERALLY AS
SOMEONE WHO REPRESENTS THE
DISTRICT THAT INCLUDES SOME OF
OUR MOST RESIDENTIALLY DENSE
DISTRICTS IN THE CITY IN
BELLTOWN, SOUTH LAKE UNION,
PIONEER SQUARE, DOWNTOWN.
BUT THEN ALSO REPRESENTS SOME
OF THE LEAST HOUSING DENSE
NEIGHBORHOODS, MAGNOLIA AND
QUEEN ANNE.
THAT THERE ARE, WHEN YOU TAKE A
WALK EVEN AROUND MAGNOLIA, AND
QUEEN ANNE, A SIGNIFICANT
AMOUNT OF REALLY ATTRACTIVE
MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENCES.
BE THEY CONDOS, BE THEY
APARTMENTS, THAT EXIST IN PART
OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD THAT DO NOT
FEEL REFLECTED.
AND I'VE TALKED TO PEOPLE WHO
LIVE IN SOME OF THOSE HOUSING
PLACEMENTS ABOUT HOW THAT FITS
INTO THE DEFINITION OF SINGLE
FAMILY NEIGHBORHOOD, AND THAT
IT'S CONFUSING TO HAVE
FOURPLEXES, TRIPLEXES IN SOME
CASES IN RESIDENTIAL
NEIGHBORHOODS.
THE GHOST OF OLD CORNER STORES,
WITH TWO STORIES ON TOP OF
THEM, THAT ARE NOW ALL HOUSING,
BECAUSE THOSE CORNER STORES CAN
NO LONGER REALLY EXIST, OR
SMALL HOUSES CAN NO LONGER
EXIST IN AREAS WHERE THEY USED
TO FLOURISH AND USED TO SERVE
THAT SURROUNDING NEIGHBORHOOD.
AND I REALLY DO THINK THAT AT
THE BARE MINIMUM, THIS REALLY
IS JUST A CONVERSATION OF
RECOGNIZING WHAT ALREADY
EXISTS.
ON MONDAY, WE GOT THE INITIAL
ATU REPORT FROM SDCI INDICATING
IN REALLY ATTRACTIVE MAP FORM,
THE DENSITY AND DISTRIBUTION OF
THE PROLIFERATION OF NEW
DWELLING UNITS, IN A LOT OF
THESE NEIGHBORHOODS, CURRENTLY
ZONED TO SINGLE FAMILY.
AND I REALLY DO THINK THAT
MOVING FORWARD, WE SHOULD JUST
ACCEPT WHAT IS TRUE HERE IN THE
IDENTITY OF THESE
NEIGHBORHOODS, AND EMBRACE IT.
THAT THERE IS AN INCREASING
AMOUNT OF URBAN AND RESIDENTIAL
DENSITY, AND THAT EVERYBODY
FEEL INCLUDED IN IN A
DEFINITION OF THESE
NEIGHBORHOODS.
CERTAINLY, AS WE MOVE FORWARD,
YOU KNOW, I'M CERTAINLY LOOKING
FORWARD TO THE DISCUSSIONS
WHERE THEY CAN BE AN INCREASED
AMOUNT OF DINEAMISM AND THAT I
BELIEVE IS A DIFFERENT
CONVERSATION THAN THIS NAME
CHANGE.
I DON'T SAY THAT TO DEVALUE THE
NAME CHANGE, BUT I SAY THAT TO
INDICATE THAT OUR WORK ISN'T
DONE.
TO MAKE ALL THE AREAS OF THE
CITY, DYNAMIC, DIVERSE, AND
INTERESTING PLACES TO LIVE.
WITH THAT, MR. CHAIR, I
APPRECIATE YOUR LEADERSHIP ON
MOVING THIS FORWARD, AND I'M
CERTAINLY PREPARED TO VOTE AT
THE CHAIR'S PLEASURE ON THIS.
SO THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU COUNCILMEMBER
LEWIS.
COUNCILMEMBER JUAREZ, ANYTHING
ON THIS BILL?
TOTALLY OKAY, IF NOT.
>> YEAH, I'M GOOD.
WE'RE GOOD, WE'RE COOL.
LET'S DO THIS.
>> I WON'T MAKE ANY FURTHER
COMMENTS, BECAUSE YOU CAN SEE
THAT I SUPPORT IT BY BEING A
COSPONSOR.
SO WE'RE GOING TO, SO AGAIN, WE
PREVIOUSLY HELD A PUBLIC
HEARING ON THIS PROPOSAL ON
JULY 28th TO GET FEEDBACK PRIOR
TO INTRODUCING LEGISLATION.
TODAY, WE'RE HOLDING THE
ADDITIONAL PUBLIC HEARING ON
THE LEGISLATION ITSELF, AND
THEN WE WILL VOTE ON THIS ON
FRIDAY WITH THE AMENDMENT
REGARDING CLARIFYING LANGUAGE
OF MEANS.
THAT'S THE PROCESS.
WE'RE GOING TO NOW MOVE INTO
THE PUBLIC HEARING, BEFORE WE
OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING, I
WOULD ASK THAT EVERYONE BE
PATIENT AS WE CONTINUE TO
OPERATE THIS NEW SYSTEM IN
REALTIME, AND NAVIGATE THROUGH
THE INEVITABLE GROWING PAINS.
WE'RE ADDING NEW FEATURES THAT
ALLOW FOR PUBLIC PARTICIPATION
IN OUR PUBLIC MEETINGS.
EACH SPEAKER WILL BE GIVEN TWO
MINUTES TO SPEAK.
I'LL CALL ON EACH SPEAKER.
IF YOU HAVE NOT YET REGISTERED
úTO SPEAK AND WOULD LIKE TO, YO
CAN GO TO SEATTLE.GOV/COUNCIL.
THE LINK IS ALSO LISTED ON
TODAY'S AGENDA.
WHEN YOU ARE UNMUTED, THAT IS
THE SPEAKER' CUE THAT IT IS
YOUR TURN TO SPEAK.
PLEASE BEGIN BY SPEAKING AND
THE ITEM IN WHICH YOU ARE
ADDRESSING.
THIS IS THE PUBLIC HEARING ON
COUNSEL BILL 120155.
IF YOU HAVE A COMMENT ON
SOMETHING THAT IS NOT THIS
COUNCIL BILL, OR NOT ON THIS
AGENDA, YOU CAN SIGN UP FOR THE
APPROPRIATE PUBLIC HEARING.
SPEAKERS WILL HEAR A CHIME WHEN
TEN SECONDS ARE LEFT OF THE
ALLOTTED TIME.
ONCE YOU HEAR THE CHIME, WE ASK
THAT YOU BEGIN TO WRAP UP YOUR
PUBLIC COMMENT.
IF SPEAKERS DO NOT END THEIR
COMMENT, THEIR MICROPHONE WILL
BE MUTED.
IF YOU PLAN TO FOLLOW THIS
MEETING, PLEASE DO SO WITH THE
SEATTLE AGENDA OPTIONS.
THE PUBLIC HEARING ON 120155 IS
NOW OPEN, AND WE WILL BEGIN
WITH THE FIRST SPEAKER ON THE
LIST.
I'M SEEING MANY PEOPLE ON THIS
LIST.
CURRENTLY NOT PRESENT ARE JUDY
BENDITCH, LAURA LOWE, DAVID
WARD, AND EVAN SHAW.
I WILL CALL A NUMBER OF NAMES
SO THAT YOU KNOW WHERE YOU ARE
ON THE LIST.
WE HAVE MATT HUTCHENS.
RYAN DONAHUE.
VANESSA MURDOCK, JAY
CATSENBERGER.
BONNEY WOOLRICH.
COLLEEN McCLEAR, DAVID WARD,
LOGAN BAUERS.
WE WILL BEGIN WITH MATTER
FOLLOWED BY BRADY NORDSTROM,
AND DAVID MAUREEN.
MATT, GOOD MORNING, HOW ARE YOU
TODAY?
>> GOOD, HOW ARE YOU ALL DOING?
>> DOING WELL.
>> LET'S SEE.
MY NAME IS MATT HUTCHENS.
I'M AN ARCHITECT AND I
REPRESENT AI SEATTLE.
I'M SPEAKIN IN FAVOR OF
SWITCHING TWO WORDS.
NEIGHBORHOOD RESIDENTIAL TO
SINGLE FAMILY, THUS MAKING
SPACE FOR THE CODE LANGUAGE TO
BE MORE CURRENT AND FLEXIBLE.
WE CURRENTLY HAVE A CODE THAT
LIVES IN THE PAST, THAT VIEWS
NEW HOUSING OR DIVERSE HOUSING
TYPES, CORNERSTONES, MIXED USES
AS AN ASSAULT ON NEIGHBORHOOD
CHARACTER, RATHER THAN PART OF
THE GREAT BACKBONE OF WHAT
MAKES OUR NEIGHBORHOOD
SPECIAL.
WE'RE ENDORSING REALLY TERRIBLE
OUTCOMES.
SO IF WE CAN'T SWITCH UP THESE
TWO WORDS, HOW ARE WE GOING TO
DO THE MUCH HARDER WORK OF
PREPARING FOR ALL THE PEOPLE
THAT ARE COMING TO LIVE HERE?
IF WE CAN'T CHANGE OUT THESE
TWO WORDS, HOW DO WE DO THE
MUCH HARDER WORK OF FIGHTING
CLIMATE CHANGE.
AND FINALLY, HOW ARE WE GOING
TO ADDRESS THESE PAST
INEQUALITIES, AND BUILD MORE
DIVERSE, WELCOMING
NEIGHBORHOODS IN THE FUTURE.
SO LET'S DO THIS, AND KEEP
GOING.
THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU, MATT.
UP NEXT IS BRADY.
GOOD MORNING, BRADY.
>> GREETINGS.
SO MY NAME IS BRADY NORTHSTROMB
I'M HERE TODAY ON BEHALF OF THE
SEATTLE COALITION.
SEATTLE FOR EVERYONE STRONGLY
SUPPORTS 125155 THAT AMENDS THE
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.
WE ARE A BROAD COALITION OF
NONPROFIT AFFORDABLE HOUSING.
PRIVATE DEVELOPERS, SOCIAL
JUSTICE ADVOCATES AND
NEIGHBORS.
AND WHAT BRINGS US TOGETHER IS
THE BELIEF THAT EVERYONE IN OUR
CITY SHOULD HAVE ACCESS TO A
SAFE, STABLE, AND AFFORDABLE
HOME.
AND LAND USE IS THE FOUNDATION
TO ACCOMPLISHING THIS GOAL.
WE BELIEVE IT IS IMPORTANT TO
DECOUPLE THIS DESIGNATION FROM
THE PAST, SO THAT WE CAN BETTER
ADDRESS OUR FUTURE NEEDS.
FIRST OF ALL, IT'S INACCURATE
AS USED.
I'M NOT GOING TO GO INTO DEPTH
ON THAT, BUT I THINK WE
SHOULDN'T ERASE THESE ASPECTS
OF OUR CITY THAT IN THE PAST
WERE IMPORTANT, AND CONTINUE TO
BE IMPORTANT.
THIS IS A PATH THAT'S BEEN
BASED ON HARM.
BY MEN IN STRUGGLES OF
COMMUNITIES OF COLOR AND
AFFORDABLE LIVING CRISIS.
THERE'S LINKING SINGLE FAMILY
ZONING AROUND THE COUNTRY, AND
NOT JUST IN SEATTLE.
SO IN SHORT, LAND USE MATTERS,
AND WORDS MATTER, WE APPRECIATE
YOUR COMMITMENT TO REALIGN OUR
LAND USE AND WE OPEN THIS WILL
ENABLE US TO HAVE A BALANCED
DISCUSSION ON OUR NEEDS IN THE
FUTURE.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
>> THANK YOU, BRADY.
UP NEXT, WE HAVE DAVID.
GREAT TO HEAR YOU AGAIN.
THERE YOU ARE.
>> HELLO.
>> THERE YOU ARE.
>> HI, THIS IS DAVID.
I'M CALLING FROM THE
PERSPECTIVE OF A MULTIFAMILY
HOMEOWNER IN THE INTERBAY
MAGNOLIA NEIGHBORHOOD OF OUR
CARING CITY.
I AGREE THE WORD FAMILY WITHIN
ZONE USE IS CONSIDERED BY SOME
AS EXCLUSIVARY, AS ROOMMATES
CAN LIVE TOGETHER WITHOUT BEING
A FAMILY.
THERE ARE THREE DISTINCT
LOOPHOLES THAT NEED DROPPED.
EITHER OF A MULTIFAMILY ZONE
AND A TOWNHOUSE, AND I CONSIDER
MY AREA AS A NEIGHBORHOOD.
SO WHY DOES THIS COUNCIL BILL
EXCLUDE MULTIFAMILY AS BEING
PART OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD?
TWO, WHY IS THE TERM
MULTIFAMILY NOT ALSO CONSIDERED
EXCLUSIONARY, AS SINGLE FAMILY
IS.
IF THERE ARE EXCLUSIONS TO
ZONING TERMS, WE MUST BE
EFFICIENT NOT TO OFFEND ALL.
THIS OVERSIGHT MAY BE BY
LEARNING FROM TACOMA, WHO IS
LOOKING TO RENAME TO LOW
TENSITY, AND MIDDLE DENSITY.
LASTLY, AND PROBABLY MORE
IMPORTANTLY.
WHY ARE THERE AT LEAST TWO
RURAL STATEMENTS REGARDING
EXPANDING HOUSING TYPES AND
BROADER RANGE OF ABUSES WITHIN
THIS COUNCIL BILL, WHICH IS
JUST A SINGLE NAME CHANGE.
YOU'RE CONFUSING A LOT OF
PEOPLE WITH THIS.
WE ARE ASKING EACH CITY COUNCIL
MEMBER DECLARE YOUR INDIVIDUAL
PLANS FOR THE CITY IN LIEU OF
SEATTLE RESIDENTS FOR WHATEVER
THEY MIGHT DESIRE FOR SEATTLE
RESIDENTIAL CHOICES.
ASK THE RESIDENCE IF LOW
DENSITY ZONES SHOULD BE
ELIMINATED.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
BE CONSISTENT WITH THE TERM
FAMILY.
BE HONEST IN THE ATTEMPT TO
ELIMINATE LOW DENSITY PROPERTY,
AND THREE, BRING BROAD IMPACT
CHOICE DEVELOPS TO THE PUBLIC.
>> THANK YOU SO MUCH, DAVID.
ALWAYS GREAT TO HEAR YOU.
UP NEXT IS SUZANNE GRANT,
FOLLOWED BY RYAN DONAHUE, AND
VANESSA MURDOCK.
SUZANNE, GOOD MORNING.
>> THIS IS SUZANNE GRANT
TALKING ABOUT CB120155.
EVERYONE IS TALK BEING THE
EXTREME IMPORTANCE OF TREES
EXCEPT SEATTLE CITY COUNCIL.
IN THIS BILL, THERE'S A LOT OF
LANGUAGE ABOUT ALLOWING
DEVELOP.
IN NEIGHBORHOOD RESIDENTIAL
AREAS.
WHAT IS MISSING IS ANY LANGUAGE
THAT WILL PROTECT THE TREES
THAT CURRENTLY EXIST IN THE
SINGLE FAMILY NEIGHBORHOODS AND
YARDS.
YOU ALL KNOW THAT 70% OF
SEATTLE'S CANOPY IS CURRENTLY
IN SINGLE FAMILY NEIGHBORHOODS.
AS SEATTLE CITY COUNCIL ENABLES
SPCI TO ALLOW MORE STRUCTURES
TOKING BUILT WITHOUT A MANDATE,
THE TREES WILL BE REMOVED IF IT
MAKES BUILDING EASIER.
MORE DENSITY IS POSSIBLE AND
DESIRABLE.
BUT DEVELOPMENT NEEDS TO BE
CREATIVE BE AND THE
RESPONSIBILITY IS ON CITY
COUNCIL TO RETAIN WHAT IS LEFT
OF OUR URBAN FOREST.
I DISAGREE THAT QUOTE, THERE IS
NO EFFECT FROM A NAME CHANGE?
A NAME CHANGE CAN MEAN A GREAT
DEAL, IF IT DOESN'T, WHY DO IT?
I DON'T FELL WE SHOULD JUST
ACCEPT IT.
PLEASE, PLEASE, INSERT
APPROPRIATE LANGUAGE TO SAVE
TREES, AND AMEND THIS
LEGISLATION BEFORE PASSING IT,
AS IT IS CURRENTLY WRITTEN.
IF I STILL HAVE TIME AT THE
BEGINNING OF THE MEETING, YOU
ALSO PROMISE TO STEWARD OUR
LAND.
WHY DO YOU NOT FOLLOW THROUGH,
AND PASS A STRONGER TREE
ORDINANCE.
YOUR ASSISTANCE TO THE TREE
ORDINANCE LANGUAGE IN THE
MAYOR'S OFFICE.
I HOPE TO HEAR FRIDAY THAT
SBCI, OR SEATTLE WILL PLACE A
MORATORIUM ON CUTTING TREES
UNTIL IT DOES.
THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU SUZANNE.
ALWAYS GREAT TO HEAR FROM YOU.
UP NEXT WE HAVE RYAN DONAHUE,
FOLLOWED BY VANESSA MURDOCK
GOOD MORNING, RYAN.
>> GOOD MORNING.
THANK YOU CHAIR STRAUSS AND
MEMBER OF THE LAND USE AND
NEIGHBORHOODS COMMITTEE.
FOR THE RECORD, MY NAME IS RYAN
DONAHUE AND I'M THE ADVOCATORY
AND POLL MANGER FOR HABITAT FOR
HUMANITY.
I'M HERE TODAY TO STRONGLY URGE
YOU TO VOTE IN FAVOR OF
AMENDING THE COMPREHENSIVE
PLAN.
WHILE THIS NAME CHANGE IN AND
OF ITSELF WON'T UNDO PAST HARMS
OR DIRECTLILY CREATE A MORE
WELCOMING AND INCLUSIVE FUTURE
FOR HOUSING IN SEATTLE, THIS
CREATES A KEY STEP IN WHAT OUR
LAND USE NEEDS.
CIVIL FAMILY ZONING, WHICH WAS
IMPLEMENTED IN 1923 AS A
HISTORY OF RACIAL AND ECONOMIC
EXCLUSION THROUGH RACIALLY
RESTRICTIVE COVENANTS.
THE EFFECTS OF THOSE ARE STILL
FELT TODAY.
THIS NAME CHANGE CAN HELP
FACILITATE A MORE BALANCED AND
SUBSTANTIAL QUESTION.
AS WE CONSIDER UPDATING OUR
ZONING TO BETTER ADDRESS THE
CHALLENGES WE'RE ACTIVELY
CONFRONTING, LIKE RACIAL
INJUSTICE, ECONOMIC EXCLUSION
AND COMMUNITY DISPLACEMENT.
OF THE 273 HOMES WE HAVE IN OUR
PIPELINE, MORE THAN 65% OF THEM
FALL WITHIN THE CITY OF
SEATTLE.
THAT IS DUE IN LARGE PART TO
THE EFFORTS OF THE SEATTLE
OFFICE OF HOUSING.
AND THESTS THAT YOU ALL HAVE
MADE ON COUNSEL LIKE THIS.
TO ALLOW THINGS LIKE MORE
DENSITY.
ACTUALLY OUR WORK IN THE SOUTH
PARK NEIGHBORHOOD.
ON OCTOBER 2nd, WE'RE ACTUALLY
CELEBRATING THE COMPLETION OF
OUR MOST RECENT DEVELOPMENT,
THANKS TO ZONING FLEXIBILITY,
WE WERE ABLE TO TURN A SINGLE
FAMILY HOME INTO 14 CURRENT
HOMES.
I ENCOURAGE YOU TO REACH OUT TO
ME, AND WE'D BE HAPPY TO PASS
ON AN INVITATION.
THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR YOUR
TIME.
>> THANK YOU, RYAN, AND THANK
YOU FOR BUILDING THE FAMILY
HOUSING THAT OUR CITY
DESPERATELY NEEDS.
UP NEXT IS VANESSA MURDOCK.
GOOD MORNING, VANESSA.
>> GOOD MORNING, CHAIR STRAUSS
AND MEMBERS OF THE LAND USE
COMMITTEE.
MY NAME IS VANESSA MURDOCK.
I'M OFFERING COMMENT THIS
MORNING ON THEIR BEHALF.
THE COMMISSION APPRECIATES THE
OPPORTUNITY TO SUPPORT COUNCIL
BILL 120155 TO RENAME THE TERM
SINGLE FAMILY NEIGHBORHOODS TO
NEIGHBORHOOD RESIDENTIAL
NEIGHBORHOODS.
THIS CHANGE WILL PROVIDE THE
AREAS WITH THE MORE ACCURATE
TITLE THAT BETTER REFLECTS THE
DIVERSITY OF HOUSEHOLDINGS
LIVING IN THEM.
THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S 2018
NEIGHBORHOODS FOR ALL REPORT
ADVISED MAKING THIS CHANGE.
THIS CORRECTION TO THE ZONING
TERM WILL ADDRESS WHAT IS
CURRENTLY A MISCHARACTERIZATION
OF BOTH THE HOUSING AVAILABLE
IN THESE AREAS, AS WELL AS THE
PEOPLE LIVING THERE.
INDEED THE TERMS SINGLE FAMILY
AREAS HAS BEEN A MISNOMER FOR
MANY AREAS, BUT ESPECIALLY
SINCE 1984.
THE COMMISSION IS SUPPORTS THE
TERM NEIGHBORHOOD RESIDENTIAL,
AS A MORE ACCURATE DESCRIPTION
OF THE HOUSING TYPES CURRENTLY
AVAILABLE IN THESE AREAS, AND
HOPE THIS NAME CHANGE WILL HELP
PAVE THE WAY FOR ENCOURAGING
MORE EQUITABLE ACCESS, ALONG
WITH PARKS, SCHOOLS AND
SERVICES FOR ALL.
THIS NAME CHANGE IS A MODEST,
BUT IMPORTANT STEP THAT
ACCURATELY FRAMES NEIGHBORHOOD
RESIDENTIAL AREAS AS HAVING A
VARIETY OF BUILDING TYPES WITH
A BROAD RANGE OF HOUSEHOLD
CONFIGURATIONS.
THE COMMISSION SUPPORTS THIS
AMENDMENT, AND THANKS
COUNCILMEMBERS FOR THIS WORK.
>> THANK YOU, VANESSA.
AND THANK YOU FOR YOUR WORK ON
THE COMMISSION.
NEXT WE HAVE JAY, FOLLOWED BY
BONNEY WILLIAMS.
>> HI, I'M JAY CATSENBERGER.
REGARDING THE NAME CHANGE, I
REALLY.
[APPLAUSE]
REALLY APPLAUD THE MORE
INCLUSIVE TERM.
BUT I WANT TO SEE THAT IF
CHANGES WERE TO HAPPEN, IT
WOULD HAVE TO HAPPEN IN
DOCUMENTATION.
THE WAY THE DOCUMENT READS NOW,
IT IS NOT INTENTED TO HAVE A
SUBSTANTIVE EFFECT.
I THINK THE ORDINANCE SHOULD
CLEARLY STATE THAT IT DOESN'T,
LIKE OTHERS ON THE COUNCIL SAID
JUST A FEW MOMENTS AGO.
I'LL POINT TO THAT NEXT TO THE
LAST STATEMENT, IT CLEARLY
STATES THAT THIS IS A STEP
TOWARD PROVISIONS PROPOSED IN
THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, AND
THAT'S A SUBSTANTIVE CHANGE.
SO I'D LIKE TO SEE THAT NEXT TO
THE LAST STATEMENT STRUCK.
THESE AMENDS IMPLY THAT ZONING
WAS PUT IN PLACE FOR CLASS
BOUNDARIES, RATHER THAN
INSTRUCTOR HEIGHT, SCALE, AND
OPEN SPACE.
I WOULD LIKE TO RESCALE A VOTE
FOR THIS NAME CHANGE, IF YOU
HAVE TO, IN ORDER TO REVISE
THIS PROPOSAL TO INCLUDE A VERY
CLEAR STATEMENT THAT ZONING
REQUIREMENTS AND PROVISIONS
DOES NOT CHANGE.
BECAUSE THE WAY IT'S CURRENTLY
WORDED, IT IS NOT SIMPLY A NAME
CHANGE, AND I THINK THAT'S
WRONG.
ALSO, REGARDLESS ON WHAT
HAPPENS ON THE SPORTS TRAINING
BILL, GO STOLEN.
>> THANK YOU, JAY.
GOOD DISCUSSION, UP NEXT, WE
HAVE JUDY BENDITCH.
>> GOOD MORNING, CAN YOU HEAR
ME.
>> WE CAN.
GREAT TO HEAR YOUR VOICE.
>> THANK YOU CHAIRPERSON
STRAUSS AND THANK YOU FOR
ASKING MR. LISH WITH HIM, THOSE
QUESTIONS.
THAT THIS IS NOT SIMPLY ECHOING
THE PREVIOUS SPEAKER, THAT THIS
IS SIMPLY NOT INTENDED TO, BUT
ACTUALLY IS NO CHANGE.
AND I ACTUALLY APPRECIATED THE
PREVIOUS SPEAKER SAYING THAT.
BUT THAT'S NOT UNTIL, I DON'T
HAVE ANY QUALMS ABOUT THIS
LANGUAGE, IF IT INDEED IS NO
CHANGE, BECAUSE MY NEIGHBORHOOD
HAS ALWAYS HAD, ONE HOUSE, ON
ONE LOT.
HAS ALWAYS HAD MIXED USE WITH
MULTIGENERATIONAL FAMILIES.
WITH SUBDIVISIONS IN A PART OF
A HOUSE.
WE'VE HAD, AT LEAST 20% OF MY
NEIGHBORHOOD, WHICH
INCIDENTALLY WAS NEVER A RED
LINED NEIGHBORHOOD HAS THAT
KIND OF CONFIGURATION ALREADY.
WHAT BOTHERS ME SO MUCH, AND
THIS IS WHERE I REALLY PART
WAYS.
THAT THE COUNCIL MAYBE, AND
I'VE QUOTED THAT IN MY LETTERS
TO YOU.
SHE SAID I LOO BE WORKING ON
LEGISLATION TO START THE
PROCESS TO APPEAL THE APARTMENT
BANS BY CONVERTING THE FSZ TO
RESIDENTIAL ZONE.
SHE HAS MADE HER ATTEMPT
ABSOLUTELY CLEAR, AND THAT'S
NOT THE WAY TO DO IT.
UNLESS SHE REPUDIATES WHAT SHE
SAID, SAYING THIS HAS NO CHANGE
ADOPTING THIS LANGUAGE, THEN I
THINK THE WHOLE THING SHOULD BE
SHOT.
THANK YOU.
I HAVE IN MY LETTER WHAT REALLY
NEEDS TO TAKE PLACE, AND THAT
IS CONCRETE PLANNING TO MAKE
SURE THAT E E.EVERY
NEIGHBORHOOD HAS AFFORDABLE
HOUSING, AND I COMPLETELY AGREE
WITH SUZANNE GRANT.
>> THANK YOU, JUDY.
PLEASE, THANK YOU FOR SENDING
IN YOUR LETTERS, AND FEEL FREE
TO SEND IN ANY FURTHER
COMMENTS.
UP NEXT, WE HAVE BONNEY
WILLIAMS, FOLLOWED BY IRENE
WALL.
AND LAURA LOWE.
LAURA, YOU'RE NOT PRESENT.
DAVID WART, ALSO NOT PRESENT.
SO I'M GOING TO RUN THROUGH THE
REMAINDER OF THE SPEAKERS, JUST
SO WE KNOW WHERE WE ARE.
RUBY, DAVID, LAURA, ARE NOT
PRESENT AT THIS TIME.
PLEASE REFER TO THE EMAIL
YOU'VE RECEIVED.
THAT IS NOT THE CALL IN LINE.
THAT IS NOT THE LISTEN LINE ON
THE AGENDA.
BONNEY, GOOD MORNING, YOU'RE
UP.
I HOPE YOU'RE HAVING A GREAT
DAY.
>> I SEE YOU THERE.
PRESS STAR 6. NOT POUND 6.
>> HELLO?
>> GOOD MORNING, WE CAN HEAR
YOU.
>> GOOD MORNING.
OKAY, GOOD MORNING.
WITH ALL THE DISCUSSION SO FAR
I'M NOT CONVINCED THIS IS JUST
A TECHNICAL CHANGE.
PART OF THE CONTRADICTIONS THAT
I'VE BEEN SEALING AND DEALING
WITH IS MUSS MUSQUEDA'S
COMMENTS.
I'M AGAINST THE PASSAGE OF
CBO120155.
THE NAME CHANGE AND THE
AMENDMENTS THAT ARE INCLUDED,
ESPECIALLY IN THE LAND USE
SECTION.
I THINK THAT THIS SHOULD BE LET
EMERGENCY THE UPDATE FOR THE
2024 PLAN, WITH A MORE THOROUGH
PROCESS.
THE PEOPLE IN SUPPORT OF THIS
ARE PRIMARILY DEVELOPERS, THE
PLANNING COMMISSION, SO DO
MENTION THAT IN THE BILL TO
INTRODUCE FUTURE REZONES, AND
NEW HOUSING TYPES, I THINK THIS
HAS NOT HAD ENOUGH CIRCULATION
TO NEIGHBORHOODS.
I THINK THEY'VE BEEN SKIPPED
OVER.
I WOULD REQUEST THAT
RESIDENTIAL AND COMMERCIAL
ZONES NEED CLEAR DISTINCTIONS
IN THIS BILL, SO THEREFORE
REMOVE LAND USE 7.11.
WHICH TALKS ABOUT INTRODUCING
LARGE SCALE APARTMENTS AND
GIVING THE COUNCIL AUTHORITY TO
PASS THAT KIND OF ZONING
CHANGE.
SO THAT LANGUAGE IS AMBIGUOUS.
IT'S OPEN FOR INTERPRETATION.
IT'S NOT CLEAR, IT'S NOT
TRANSPARENT.
I FEEL THERE ARE TOP DOWN
DIVISIONS WITHOUT EXTENSIVE
OUTREACH.
ALSO, I WANT TO CLARIFY THAT IN
2019, SINGLE FAMILY, UH-OH,
THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU, BONNEY.
APPRECIATE IT, AND FEEL FREE --
>> THANK YOU.
CAN I MAKE ONE QUICK COMMENT?
>> YEAH, YOU STOPPED AT TEN
SECONDS.
ACTUALLY, I HAVE TO REMAIN
CONSISTENT.
IF YOU COULD EMAIL IN, OR IF
YOU NEED A CHAT, WE CAN TALK
OFFLINE.
>> ALL RIGHT, THANK YOU, BYE
BYE.
>> UP NEXT IS IRENE WALL
FOLLOWED BY LAURA.
YOU ARE NOT PRESENT.
WE HAVE IRENE, LAURA, ALICIA,
COLLEEN.
GOOD MORNING, IRENE.
>> GOOD MORNING.
CAN YOU HEAR ME?
>> WE CAN.
>> MY NAME IS IRENE WALL.
IF YOU WANT TO CHANGE SIMPLY BE
HONEST ABOUT IT.
LABELING DOES NOTHING BUT
SIMPLY CREATE FURTHER
CONFUSION.
SINCE THERE IS NO QUOTE
DEFINITION OF A NEIGHBORHOOD
RESIDENTIAL ZONE.
AND IT IS NOT TYPICAL TO NAME A
ZONE AFTER HISTORICAL
NONCONFORMING USES.
WHY NOT ACT ON YOUR OWN BUDGET
AND EVALUATE THE BENEFITS AND
IMPACT OF ALLOWING MORE DENSITY
IN SINGLE FAMILY ZONES IN THE
ONUPDATE.
ALSO THE TREE PLANS CONSIDERED
ARE INTIMATELY CONNECTED TO
SINGLE FAMILY ZONING, SINCE
MOST TREES ARE IN SINGLE FAMILY
ZONES.
CHANGING THE LAND USE PATTERNS
AFFECTING THOUSANDS OF PROPERTY
OWNERS REQUIRES A TRANSPARENT
PROCESS, AND SOLID ANALYSIS.
DETAILS.
SO WAIT UNTIL THE UPDATE AND
THE ACCOMPANYING EIS IS
AVAILABLE, TO DECIDE WHAT
SHOULD BE ALLOWED IN SINGLE
FAMILY ZONES AND THEN RENAME IT
ACCORDINGLY.
THE PROPOSED NEIGHBORHOOD
RESIDENTIAL LABEL DOES NOT
DISTINGUISH THE SINGLE FAMILY
ZONE USES FROM OUR PRIMARILY
RESIDENTIAL ZONES IN THE SAME
NEIGHBORHOODS.
THIS FURTHER ADDS TO CONFUSION.
MERELY RENAMING THE ZONE DOES
NOTHING TO REDUCE THE COST OF
HOUSING IN SEATTLE OR REDUCE
THE HOMELESS CRISIS.
THE COUNCIL SHOULD ALLOW THE
COMP PLAN PROCESS TO PROCEED,
AND THEN TAKE THE ACTIONS TO
MAKE ANY ZONING CHANGES TO
ACCOMPLISH THE STATED GOALS.
THE ZONE NAME WILL BE JUSTIFIED
AT THAT POINT, NOT NOW.
>> THANK YOU, IRENE.
LAURA LOWE IS NEXT, BUT NOT
PRESENT.
SO LAURA, IF YOU ARE LISTENING
PLEASE DO CALL BACK IN.
NEXT, WE HAVE ALICIA RUIZ.
DAVID WARD, YOU ARE NOT
PRESENT, AND YOU WOULD BE AFTER
COLLEEN.
IF YOU DON'T CALL IN, LOGAN
BAUERS WILL FOLLOW.
GOOD MORNING, ALICIA.
>> GOOD MORNING.
MY NAME IS ALICIA RUIZ, I'M
HERE TODAY TO EXPRESS THAT
MASTER BUILDERS ASSOCIATION OF
KING COUNTY FULLY SUPPORT THE
PROPOSED AMENDMENT THAT JUST
CHANGES THE NAME OF THE SINGLE
FAMILY ZONE TO A MORE INCLUSIVE
NAME OF NEIGHBORHOOD
RESIDENTIAL ZONE.
IT IS AN IMPORTANT MOVE FORWARD
TO SUPPORT MORE DIVERSE AND
EXWIT TABLE NEIGHBORHOODS.
IT ALSO ADDS TO OPPORTUNITY.
I'M SORRY, I'LL END IT THERE,
BUT YES, WE DEFINITELY SUPPORT
THIS AMENDMENT.
THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU, ALICIA.
UP NEXT IS COLLEEN McCLEAR
FOLLOWED BY LOGAN BAUERS, EVAN
SHAW.
PLEASE CALL IN IF YOU WOULD
LIKE TO TESTIFY.
GOOD MORNING, COLLEEN.
COLLEEN?
I SEE YOU'RE THERE, PRESS STAR
6, NOT POUND 6. STAR 6.
THERE YOU ARE.
OFF MUTE.
I CAN HEAR YOUR VOICE.
>> THANK YOU CHAIR STRAUSS.
THIS IS COLLEEN.
I'M REPRESENTING LAW OFFICE
COMMUNITY CLUB.
WE'RE TALKING TODAY ABOUT
120155.
THE NAME CHANGE FOR A
RESIDENTIAL IS NOT OFFENSIVE AT
ALL.
IT'S ACTUALLY VERY INCLUSIVE TO
REFLECT AS COUNCIL HAS NOTED IN
CENTRAL STAFF THE TYPES OF
HOUSING DIVERSITY THAT WE
ALREADY HAVE EVEN IN OUR
NEIGHBORHOOD.
I KNOW PEOPLE WOULD BE
SURPRISED ABOUT THAT, BUT
THERE'S PLENTY OF DUPLEXES,
ADU'S, APARTMENTS ON THE EDGES.
IT'S ALL FINE.
IT'S ALL PART OF THE
NEIGHBORHOOD.
SO THAT'S A GREAT THING.
OTHER SPEAKERS HAVE MENTIONED
WE HAVE TO BE CAREFUL THAT THIS
LEGISLATION DOES NOT EMBED SOME
UNRELATED STATEMENTS, AND I
THINK YOU MADE IT VERY CLEAR
THAT IT WAS JUST A CLEAN BILL.
JUST CHANGING THE NAME, BUT I
THINK THE BILL REALLY NEEDS TO
BE SCOPED THROUGH, TO BE SURE
THAT WE TAKE OUT ANYTHING
THAT'S NOT RELATED TO THE NAME
CHANGE.
A COUPLE OF OTHER THINGS, THE
GOAL IS TO PROMOTE MORE HOME
OWNERSHIP.
THAT'S A GREAT GOAL FOR THIS
CHANGE OF NAME.
SECONDLY, THE LEGISLATION
EMPHASIZES THE NAME CHARACTER
NEIGHBORHOOD, ESPECIALLY
LU7.10.
IT SAYS REFLECT THE CHARACTER
OF THE LOW DENSITY DEVELOPMENT
THROUGH THE SCALE, AND
STRUCTURE AND SET BACKS.
BUT WHO POLICES THAT?
I THINK THE BIGGER PROBLEM IS
ALL THOSE THAT SEE IT SEATTLE
DEPARTMENT OF CONSTRUCTION AND
INSPECTIONS CONTINUALLY GIVES
THE INSPECTIONS THE DESIGN VIEW
HAS PRETTY MUCH MADE IT
PROFESSIONALS.
EVEN IF THEY'RE GRANTED,
THERE'S NO WAY TO POLICE THAT
CHARACTER.
I THINK IN LEGISLATION COMES TO
BE WITH THIS CHANGE, WE DO
REALLY NEED TO PUT MECHANISMS
THERE FOR PROTECTING THAT
CHARACTER AND HOW IT'S GOING TO
BE DONE.
THEN LASTLY, THE TREE CANOPY
IS, AS WE ALL KNOW IN THIS
COMMUNITY, MOSTLY EMBEDDED INTO
THE SINGLE FAMILY, WHICH IS THE
RESIDENTIAL AREAS.
FOR THE LAST 20 YEARS, THE
SINGLE FAMILY HAS LOST ABOUT
10% OF THEIR CANOPY.
MULTIFAMILY HOUSING WENT FROM
18% TO 5%, AND THAT'S SOMETHING
WE NEED TO EMBED WITH THE TREE
PROTECTION.
>> GREAT TO HEAR FROM YOU.
UP NEXT, WE HAVE LOGAN BAUERS.
THAT WILL COMPLETE OUR LIST
UNLESS DAVID WARD, OR RUBY
HOLLAND DOES CALL IN.
LOGAN, GOOD MORNING.
>> GOOD MORNING.
THANK YOU COUNCILMEMBERS FOR
YOUR TIME.
MY NAME'S LOGAN BAUERS.
I'M A SMALL BUSINESS OWNER.
IN DISTRICT 7. YOU WILL HEAR,
YOU'VE HEARD A LOT OF OTHER
PUBLIC COMMENTS SUPPORTING THIS
LEGISLATION ON VISIBILITY AND
EQUITY GROUNDS.
I COSIGN ALL OF THAT.
COMPLETELY AGREE.
WE NEED THIS LEGISLATION AND WE
NEED MORE.
WE NEED CUSTOMERS.
WE NEED MORE CUSTOMERS.
WE NEED CUSTOMERS WHO CAN WALK
TO OUR BUSINESSES.
WE NEED CUSTOMERS WHO CAN BIKE
TO OUR BUSINESSES.
WE ALSO NEED EMPLOYEES TO BE
ABLE TO AFFORD TO LIVE FLEER
WORK AND NOT COMMUTE AN HOUR
FROM OUTSIDE OF THE CITY.
THIS ORDINANCE IS A SMART FIRST
STEP TOWARD SUPPORTING US, AND
PLACING EMPLOYEES NEAR OUR
BUSINESS.
IF YOU CARE ABOUT BUSINESSES,
YOU WILL SUPPORT THIS
ORDINANCE, AND HOUSING STOCK AT
ALL INCOME LEVELS.
THANK YOU CHAIR STRAUSS FOR ALL
OF YOUR HARD WORK ON THIS.
>> THANK YOU, LOGAN.
ALWAYS NICE TO HEAR YOUR VOICE.
UP NEXT IS EVAN SHAW.
FOLLOW THE BY STEVE, DAVID
WARD, ROBEY HOLLAND, YOU ARE
STILL NOT PRESENT.
SO PLEASE CALL IN IF YOU'D LIKE
TO SPEAK.
GOOD MORNING, EVAN.
>> HELLO.
THIS IS EVAN SHAW.
FIRST TIME I'VE COMMENTED ON A
MEETING LIKE THIS.
I WILL SAY I HAD TO WAIT A
WHILE TO GET ON HERE, BUT I
APPRECIATE THE CHANCE TO BE
ABLE TO TALK.
I AGREE WITH PEOPLE WHO HAVE
TALKED ABOUT MAKING MORE HUMAN
FOCUSED NEIGHBORHOODS IN
SEATTLE, GETTING AWAY FROM THE
ZONING CODE THAT LOCKS US INTO
KIND OF A SUBURBAN STYLE
DEVELOPMENT PATTERN.
I AGREE WITH PEOPLE WHO HAVE
HIGHLIGHTED THE RACIAL HISTORY
OF THIS SPECIFIC TYPE OF ZONING
DESIGNATION, AND HOW CHANGING
THAT NAME IS, YOU KNOW, A STEP
TOWARDS PERHAPS GETTING BACK TO
A BETTER PLACE THERE.
THEN ON CLIMATE CHANGE,
OBVIOUSLY SPRAWL, COMMUTING,
ALL OF THAT IS VERY BAD FOR
THAT.
I APPRECIATE THE FOLKS TALKING
ABOUT TREES.
BUT FOR HE EVERY TREE HERE THAT
WE'RE PROTECTING, THAT DOESN'T
HELP OUT IN THE NET ON THE
CLIMATE CHANGE SITUATION, IF
WE'RE BULLDOZING ACRES TO BUILD
NEW SUBURBS.
I'D LOVE TO SEE THE TREES
PROTECTED HERE, BUT GOT TO
THINK GLOBALLY.
ALL OF THOSE REASONS, I SUPPORT
THE NAME CHANGE.
>> THANK YOU, EVAN.
LAST, AND DEFINITELY NOT LEAST,
STEVE ZEMKE.
LAST CALL FOR DAVID, AND RUBY.
FOR THOSE THAT ARE NOT PRESENT,
PLEASE MAKE SURE YOU HAVE
RECEIVED, AND ARE CALLING IN
VIA THE EMAIL CALLING LINE, NOT
THE LISTEN LINE ON THE AGENDA.
TAKE IT AWAY MR. ZEMKE.
GOOD MORNING TO YOU.
>> STEVE ZEMKE WITH TREE PACK .
A COUPLE OF COMMENTS, NOTICING
THAT IT DOESN'T APPEAR IN THIS
THAT YOU SPECIFICALLY MENTION
THE TREE PROTECTION ORDINANCE
WHICH HAS LANGUAGE OF SINGLE
FAMILY IN IT.
IF YOU'RE GOING TO NOT CHANGE
THAT, BUT CHANGE OTHER THINGS,
I THINK YOU REALLY NEED TO LOOK
AND SEE IF THERE ARE OTHER
PLACES THAT YOU'RE MISSING
WHERE A SINGLE FAMILY LANGUAGE
IS, BECAUSE THAT WOULD CREATE
GREAT CONFUSION, AND IT MEANS
THAT SDCI IS GOING TO HAVE TO
CHANGE A LOT OF THEIR MEMOS AND
OTHER THINGS THAT RELATE TO
SINGLE FAMILY.
JUST BY CHANGING THE NAME.
BECAUSE YOU'RE GOING TO CREATE
A LOT OF CONFUSION.
THE OTHER POINT COMING UP HERE
IS THAT WE'RE NOT FOOLING
ANYBODY.
WHAT YOU ARE DOING IS LOOKING
AT MORE DENSITY?
IN THE CITY.
TREE PACK IS NOT AGAINST THAT.
WE SUPPORT THE NEED FOR
MAINTAINING TREES AND
INCREASING OUR TREE CANOPY UP
TO THE LEVEL THAT WE PROPOSED.
CERTAINLY, A LOT OF THAT, BUT
WE NEED A THOROUGH DISCUSSION
ON HOW DO WE DO THAT, AND PART
OF THE PROBLEM IS, WE'VE GONE
12 YEARS NOW WITHOUT UPDATING
THE TREE ORDINANCE, LOOKING AT
THINGS THAT COULD BE DONE TO
PROTECT TREES.
IN OPPOSITION TO WHAT THE LAST
PERSON SAID, TREES CREATE
HEALTHY COMMUNITIES.
WE LIVE IN SEATTLE.
WE WANT TO KEEP SEATTLE
HEALTHY.
THE URBAN HEAT IS WHAT HAPPENS
WHEN YOU DON'T HAVE A LOT OF
TREES.
AND WE SEE THAT IN THE SOUTH,
AND WE NEED TO PROTECT THAT.
A POLL THAT CAME OUT, YOU'VE
PROBABLY SEEN THAT, 70, 80% OF
THE PEOPLE THAT WERE POLLED,
VOTERS THAT WERE POLLED,
SUPPORT STRONGER TREE
PROTECTION, INCLUDING THINGS
LIKE MAXIMIZING THE RETENSION
OF EXISTING TREES THROUGHOUT
THE WHOLE DEVELOPMENT PROCESS.
SO PLEASE KEEP THAT IN MIND IN
TERMS OF MOVING FORWARD, WE
NEED A THOROUGH DISCUSSION OF
ALL OF OUR OPTIONS OF HOUSING
IN THE CITY AND HOW WE CAN
MAXIMIZE TREES AT THE SAME
TIME.
THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU.
ALWAYS GREAT TO HEAR FROM YOU
STEVE.
I.T., YOU CAN CONFIRM THEY'RE
NOT PRESENT?
>> THERE ARE NO MORE PUBLIC
HEARING REGISTRANTS.
>> EXCELLENT.
THANK YOU.
THAT WAS OUR LAST SPEAKER
REMOTELY PRESENT TO SPEAK AT
THIS PUBLIC HEARING.
THE PUBLIC HEARING ON COUNSEL
BILL 120155 IS NOW CLOSED.
THANK YOU TO EVERYONE WHO
PROVIDED COMMENT TODAY.
THIS LEGISLATION WILL BE BACK
BEFORE THE COMMITTEE ON FRIDAY
AFTERNOON FOR A POSSIBLE VOTE.
WANTING TO ALERT EVERYONE THAT
WAS THE THIRD OF FIVE ITEMS.
WE'RE MOVING INTO ITEM FOUR.
THE BELLTOWN SMALL LOT.
IF MY COLLEAGUES ARE
COMFORTABLE, AFTER THE PUBLIC
HEARING, I WOULD LIKE TO
SUSPEND THE RULES TO HAVE A
VOTE ON THE SAME DAY AS THE
LEGISLATION RECEIVED A PUBLIC
HEARING, BECAUSE WE'VE HAD THIS
LEGISLATION IN OUR COMMITTEE
BEFORE US BEFORE.
SO OUR NEXT ITEM OF BUSINESS IS
A BRIEFING ON COUNSEL BILL
120153, MR. OM, WOULD YOU
PLEASE READ THE ABBREVIATED
TITLE INTO RECORD.
>> AN ORDINANCE RELATING TO
LAND USE IN ZONING.
ADDINGA NEW SECTION TO PROVIDE
ALTERNATIVE DEVELOPMENT
STANDARDS FOR SMALL LOTS
LOCATED IN DOWNTOWN MIXED
RESIDENTIAL ZONES.
>> THANK YOU.
WE RECEIVED A BRIEFING ON OUR
AUGUST 11th DEEDING.
WE'RE JOINED TODAY BY THE
AMAZING BRENNON STALEY.
ONCE AGAIN, LISH WHITSON OF OUR
COUNCIL CENTRAL IS STAFF.
BEFORE YOU BEGIN, JUST A
REMINDER, I'M GOING TO BE
ASKING FOR A VOTE AFTER THE
PUBLIC HEARING JUST AS A
REMAINDER.
BRENNON, LISH, CAN YOU PROVIDE
US A BRIEF OVERVIEW.
>> YES, I'M GOING TO HAVE A
POWERPOINT.
SHOULD BE COMING UP NOW.
THIS LEGISLATION CALLED SMALL
LOT DEVELOPMENT IN BELLTOWN,
SORRY, IT'S NOT GOING TO FULL
SCREEN FOR SOME REASON.
SORRY. THERE WE GO.
>> THERE WE ARE.
>> SO THE PURPOSE OF THIS
LEGISLATION IS FOR MORE
APPROPRIATE DEVELOPMENT
STANDARDS FOR SMALL LOTS IN
LIMITED AREAS OF BELLTOWN IN
ORDER TO CREATE MORE ADDITIONAL
HOUSING AND ALSO TO SUPPORT
INNOVATIVE TYPES OF
CONSTRUCTION THAT CAN HELP TO
BRING DOWN COSTS AND MEET
ENVIRONMENTAL GOALS.
THE CHALLENGE RIGHT NOW IS IT
IS DIFFICULT TO BUILD ON SMALL
TOWNS ON THE NORTH SIDE.
THAT'S FOR TWO REASONS.
THE HEIGHT LIMIT OF 145 FEET
ALREADY REQUIRES STEEL
CONSTRUCTION.
ANYTIME YOU GO OVER 85 FEET,
THAT'S ALREADY THE CASE.
SO IT'S ALREADY DIFFICULT.
WE HAVE DEVELOPMENT THAT
REQUIRES BUILDING SHAPES THAT
MAKE THAT EVEN MORE
IMPRACTICAL.
AT THE SAME TIME, THERE'S A NEW
OPPORTUNITY THAT HAS PRESENTED
ITSELF ALLOWING IT TO BECOME
MORE EASIER TO BUILD ON THESE
KIND OF DIFFICULT SITES THAT GO
UP TO 145 FEET.
BUT AT THE SAME TIME, THEY
REQUIRE A STACKING OF UNITS AND
SO THAT DEVELOPMENT STANDARD IN
PARTICULAR MAKES THEM VERY
CHALLENGING TO USE ON THESE
SITES.
SO THE PROPOSAL IS, WOULD ALLOW
TO THE DMR ZONES IN BELLTOWN
THAT HAVE A HIGHLIGHT LIMIT OF
145 FEET.
YOU CAN SEE ON THE MAP ON THE
RIGHT, IT'S THOSE AREAS SHADED
IN GRAY.
IT IS 33 BLOCKS.
ADDITIONALLY, THOSE SITES WOULD
HAVE TO BE LESS THAN 14,500
SQUARE FEET AND THE BUILDING ON
THEM WOULD HAVE TO BE AT LEAST
75% RESIDENTIAL.
SO ALSO ON THAT MAP WE'VE SHOWN
IN YELLOW AND BLUE THE SITES
THAT WHERE THIS, THAT MEET THAT
SIZE THRESHOLD, AND COULD
POTENTIALLY HAVE THIS APPLIED
TO IT.
THE OTHERS ARE SINGLE LOTS, AND
THE BLUE ONES ARE DOUBLE THAT
SIZE.
IN TERMS OF WHAT EXISTS ON
THIS, THERE IS NO HOUSING ON
ANY OF THESE SITES TODAY.
SO WE DON'T EXPECT THERE WOULD
BE ANY DISPLACEMENT RISK.
OF THESE 24 SITES THAT ARE
HIGHLIGHTED, THERE IS ONE
THAT'S UNDER DEVELOPMENT RIGHT
NOW.
THAT'S THE 303 BATTERY SITE.
SIX OF THEM ARE PARKING LOTS,
AND THE REMAINDER ARE HOTEL
USES, ALMOST ALL ARE ONE STORY,
BUT SOME ARE TWO STORIES.
THE ACTUAL CHANGE FOR PROPOSING
ON THOSE SITES IS SIMPLY
ALLOWING HOUSING DEVELOPMENT TO
HAVE A SLIGHTLY DIFFERENT
SHAPE.
THAT WOULD BE ACCOMPLISHED BY
TWO THINGS.
ONE, THERE ARE TWO DIFFERENT
POINTS AT WHICH SET BACKS KICK
IN, WHICH CAUSE KIND OF A STAIR
STEP.
WE'RE SIMPLIFYING THAT DOWN TO
ONE.
THEN WE'RE REQUIRING THEM TO BE
LOWER.
THAT WOULD SIMPLY BE SET BACK
CLOSER TO THE STREET.
I WOULD HIGHLIGHT THIS WOULD
NOT INCREASE THE SIZE OF THESE
BUILDINGS.
IT DOES NOT CHANGE THE AMOUNT
OF TOTAL FLOOR AREA, OR THE
MAXIMUM HEIGHT OF THESE
BUILDINGSMENT THE IDEA AGAIN IS
REALLY TO HAVE A DIFFERENT
SHAPE THAT WOULD MAKE IT MUCH
EASIER FOR ANY TYPE OF
CONSTRUCTION, BUT ESPECIALLY
FOR INNOVATIVE CONSTRUCTION.
AGAIN, THIS IS A SHAPE THAT IS
MUCH MORE CONSISTENT, THE
EXISTING REGULATIONS REALLY ARE
UNIQUE TO BELLTOWN.
WE DON'T SEE THAT ANYWHERE
ELSE.
SO AGAIN, THIS CHANGE WOULD
APPLY TO ANY KIND OF
CONSTRUCTION.
WE THINK IT WOULD BE HELPFUL TO
BASICALLY ANY KIND OF
CONSTRUCTION, BUT ESPECIALLY
INNOVATIVE APPROACHES THAT NEED
THAT MORE SIMPLER SHAPE TO
ALLOW STACKING OF UNITS.
AGAIN, PROPERTY OWNERS COULD
CONTINUE TO DEVELOP UNDER THE
EXISTING CODE THAT THEY HAVE
TODAY.
SO IT WOULD NOT AFFECT ANYBODY
WHO ALREADY IS PLANNING TO TAKE
ADVANTAGE OF WHAT WE SEE TODAY.
SO ON THE RIGHT WE JUST HAVE AN
EXAMPLE OF WHAT THIS LOOKS
LIKE.
THE LEFT ARE THE EXISTING
RULES.
AND THE RIGHT IS THE PROPOSED
RULES.
THIS IS PROBABLY THE MOST
EXTREME EXAMPLE OF A CHANGE YOU
MIGHT SEE, IT'S ON SITES THAT
ARE ON THE NORTH SIDE OF THE
GREEN STREETS.
WE HAD A GREEN STREET SET BACK.
AND YOU CAN SEE HOW IT SIMPLY
TAKES TWO STAIR STEPS AND TURNS
INTO ONE.
THEN REDUCES THE HEIGHT OF THAT
SET BACK SO IT HAS, YOU SEE
IT'S MORE IMPACT WHEN YOU SEE
FROM THE STREET.
BUT THE SHAPE IS A LOT SIMPLER.
I ALSO HAVE ONE EXAMPLE WHICH
IS A MOST MORE COMMON ONE FOR
THE LOTS THAT ARE NOT ON A
GREEN STREET OR ARE ON THE
SOUTH SIDE OF GREEN STREET.
YOU CAN SEE TODAY PROJECTS ARE
ALREADY ALLOWED TO BUILD KIND
OF AS A WALL ON THE STREET.
THAT WOULDN'T CHANGE.
AND SO FOR THESE LOTS YOU
PROBABLY WOULD NOT NOTICE VERY
MUCH FROM THE STREET.
THE BIG CHANGE WOULD BE THAT
THE KIND OF THE INTERIOR LIGHT
WELL.
SO UNDER THIS PROPOSAL, THE
LIGHT WELL WOULD BE A LITTLE
SMALLER, BUT IT WOULD GO DOWN
FARTHER TO THE BOTTOM UNITS AS
WELL.
SO FOR MOST SITES, AGAIN THIS
IS ENTERTAINED TO ENCOURAGE
HOUSING.
WE MIGHT GET HOUSING WE
WOULDN'T GET OTHERWISE.
THE PROPOSED RULES ON MOST
SITES, IT WOULDN'T MAKE MUCH
DIFFERENCE FROM THE STREET.
BUT RATHER, YOU KNOW, KIND OF
IMPACT THAT LIGHT WELL.
SO THAT'S MY PRESENTATION.
>> WONDERFUL LAST SLIDE.
THANK YOU.
I LOVE IT.
I DO HAVE TWO QUESTIONS.
JUST GENERALLY, AND I KNOW YOU
MENTIONED THIS, I'M JUST TRYING
TO RAISE THE TYPE, DOES THIS
INCREASE THE DEVELOPMENT
CAPACITY OF THESE SITES IN
BELLTOWN?
>> IT DOES NOT.
IT DOES NOT CHANGE THE FLOOR
AREA OR THE MAXIMUM HEIGHT.
>> GREAT.
AND SO DEVELOPMENT CAPACITY
REMAINS THE SAME.
MY OFFICE HAS ALSO HEARD FROM
SOME PROPERTY OWNERS IN
BELLTOWN INTERESTED TO APPLY
FOR MORE PROPERTIES.
CAN YOU SHARE WHY THIS IS JUST
LIMITED TO THE SMALL LOTS?
>> THIS IS REALLY FOCUSED ON
THE SMALL LOTS, BECAUSE THERE'S
WHERE HOUSING PRODUCTION IS THE
MOST DIFFICULT ON THE SINGLE
LOTS.
WE HAVEN'T SEEN ANY PROJECTS
ABLE TO DEVELOP UP TO THAT 145
FEET ON A SINGLE LOT.
WE'VE SEEN ONLY ONE IN RECENT
HISTORY, A DOUBLE LOT.
THESE ARE WHERE OUR DEVELOPMENT
STANDARDS ARE MAKING IT REALLY
DIFFICULT FOR PROJECTS TO
DEVELOP.
ON LARGER LOTS, WE'RE SEEING
IT'S EASIER FOR THEM TO HAPPEN
WITH THE UNDERGROUND PARKING.
WE'RE FOCUSING WHERE THE
DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS ARE
REALLY PREVENTING HOUSING
DEVELOPMENT.
>> WONDERFUL, THANK YOU,
BRENNON.
COLLEAGUES, DO YOU HAVE ANY
QUESTIONS BEFORE WE MOVE INTO
PUBLIC HEARING?
I KNOW THIS IS THE SECOND TIME
WE'VE HAD THIS BILL BEFORE US.
COUNCILMEMBER LEWIS.
>> YES, THANK YOU COUNCILMEMBER
STRAUSS.
SO AM I COUNTING CORRECTLY ON
THE MAP ON SLIDE 5 THAT THIS
WOULD ONLY IMPACT ABOUT 24 LOTS
AT IT'S PRESENTLY CONSTITUTED
IN THE AREA WHERE IT WOULD BE
IN EFFECT?
>> THAT'S RIGHT.
OBVIOUSLY LOTS COULD IN THE
FUTURE BE SUBDIVIDED, BUT AS
THEY EXIST TODAY, WE FOUND 24
LOTS THAT MEET THE SIZE
CRITERIA.
>> RIGHT.
I HAVE A COUPLE ADDITIONAL
QUESTIONS BASED ON SOME
NEIGHBORHOOD CONCERNS THAT I'VE
HEARD FROM RESIDENTS.
REGARDING THE POTENTIAL IMPACT
THAT THE DIFFERENCE IN SHAPE
PERMITTED UNDER THIS ORDINANCE
WOULD ALLOW TO MAKE THIS SMALL
LOT DEVELOPMENT FEASIBLE IN
TERMS OF CONCERNS ABOUT THE
DIFFERENCE BETWEEN MODULAR AND
PANELED BUILDINGS AND
TRADITIONAL CONCRETE AND STEEL
BUILDINGS.
TO MAINTAIN VIEW CORRIDORS OR
ACCESS TO LIGHT, POTENTIALLY IF
THE BUILDINGS ARE SORT OF
BULKIER.
HOW WOULD YOU ADDRESS THE
POTENTIAL CONCERNS?
WE'VE JUST HAD A GOOD
CONVERSATION ABOUT HOW FLOOR
AREA RATIO AND HEIGHT IS GOING
TO REMAIN CONSISTENT.
SO I THINK THESE ARE REALLY
POTENTIAL CONCERNS COMING FROM
RESIDENTS REGARDING THE
POTENTIAL CHANGE IN SHAPE.
I'M JUST CURIOUS IF THERE'S
ANALYSIS ON WHETHER THERE COULD
BE SORT OF CONCERNS ABOUT
BUILDING LIGHTING OR THE
CORRIDOR WHERE THE SHAPE MAKES
A MEANINGFUL DIFFERENCE IN THAT
BEING AN ISSUE?
>> YEAH.
SO I GUESS, FIRST, JUST TO
CLARIFY IN TERMS OF THE TYPE OF
CONSTRUCTION, WE DON'T EXPECT
THAT THERE WOULD BE A
DIFFERENCE BETWEEN, YOU KNOW
STEEL AND CONCRETE CONSTRUCTION
VERSUS PANELLIZED OR
MODULARIZED CONSTRUCTION IN
TERMS OF HOW THEY WOULD LIKE.
THEY WOULD TEND TO HAVE THE
SAME FORM.
AND YOU KNOW, IN TERMS OF THE,
OBVIOUSLY ONE OF THE INTENTS
HERE IS TO MAKE IT EASIER TO
BUILD HOUSING.
IT IS POSSIBLE WE MIGHT SEE
HOUSING ON LIVE LOTS WHERE WE
MIGHT NOT OTHERWISE SEE IT.
BUT IN TERMS OF THE SHAPE
ITSELF, ON MOST LOTS, YOU'RE
ALREADY ALLOWED TO BUILD KIND
OF TO THE STREET LOT LINE.
SO ON MOST LOTS, PROBABLY THE
SHAPE WOULDN'T CHANGE THAT
MUCH.
THIS IS AGAIN, AN EXAMPLE, IF
THERE'S NO GREEN STREET, IT IS
POSSIBLE THERE COULD BE SMALL
CHANGES IN TERMS OF HOW CLOSE
THEY GET TO THE ALLEY.
BUT IN GENERAL DEVELOPERS TEND
TO WANT TO HAVE WINDOWS AND
RESERVE THINGS FOR THE LIGHT
WELL.
SO ON MOST LOTS YOU PROBABLY
WON'T SEE A LOT OF SHAPE
DIFFERENCES FROM THE STREET.
BUT THEN OBVIOUSLY ON GREEN
STREETS WE ARE PROPOSING TO
CHANGE THE GREEN STREET SET
BACK, SO THAT IT IS, YOU KNOW,
IT STARTS LOWER TO THE STREET,
BUT IT'S MORE CONSISTENT.
AGAIN, BUT WE ARE ONLY ALLOWING
THAT ON THE NORTH SIDE OF THE
GREEN STREETS.
THERE DEFINITELY WOULD BE A
VISUAL IMPACT FOR SURE.
BUT IT SHOULDN'T HAVE AN IMPACT
ON THE AMOUNT OF LIGHT THAT
GETS DOWN TO THOSE GREEN
STREETS.
SO I THINK, SO OVERALL, THERE
DEFINITELY WOULD BE SMALL
CHANGES.
I THINK AS WE TALK TO PEOPLE
ABOUT THESE CHANGES, THEY WOULD
BE A LITTLE BIT WIDER AT THE
TOP, WHICH MIGHT MAKE THEM A
LITTLE BULKIER, BUT IT WOULD
FEEL LIKE THE BUILDING IS
PUSHED BACK FROM THE STREET, IF
YOU'RE WALKING ON A SIDEWALK,
FOR EXAMPLE.
SO THERE ARE SMALL DIFFERENCES.
BUT OVERALL THEY DON'T SEEM TO
BE VERY LARGE VISUAL DISTRICTS
DISTINCTIONS.
AND REALLY WERE DESIGNED TO NOT
HAVE MUCH IMPACT ON LIGHT IN
THE STREET, BECAUSE THAT'S
SOMETHING VERY IMPORTANT TO
THESE NEIGHBORHOODS.
>> ON THE VIEW CORRIDOR ISSUE,
THE LEGISLATION DOES NOT NEAT
THE SET BACK REQUIREMENTS.
>> THANK YOU FOR CONFIRMING
THAT.
SO PIVOTING TO, TO THE
CONVERSATION ON THE IMPACT.
YOU ANTICIPATE THAT THIS CHANGE
AND THE POSSIBILITY THAT THESE
24 LOTS WILL BE ABLE TO BENEFIT
FROM MODULAR CONSTRUCTION,
WHICH COULD IN TURN CREATE MORE
DEMAND FOR MATERIALS LIKE
TIMBER OR BUILDING PRACTICES
THAT WE KNOW ARE MORE
ENVIRONMENTALLY CONSCIOUS AND
LESS CO2 INTENSIVE.
DO WE SEE INCENTIVIZING THE
DEVELOPMENT ON THE LOTS
SITUATED HERE, AND HOW WE MIGHT
BE MAKING THAT MORE VIABLE.
DO YOU CARE TO COMMENT ON THAT
AT ALL?
>> YEAH, SO OBVIOUSLY ONE OF
THE INTENTS OF THIS LEGISLATION
IS TO TRY AND MAKE IT EASIER
FOR INNOVATIVE CONSTRUCTION
APPROACHES TO BE USED.
OBVIOUSLY, WE'RE NOT TRYING TO
KIND OF PREFER THEM OVER OTHER
TYPES.
THIS WOULD HELP BASICALLY
ANYONE WHO WANTS TO DEVELOP
THROUGH ANY KIND OF APPROACH,
BUT WE DO WANT TO MAKE IT
FEASIBLE, SO PEOPLE WITH START
PILOTING, AND TESTING THOSE.
WE DO KNOW THAT FROM PAST CAMPS
AND CURRENT BUILDING PRACTICES
THAT IT DOES PANELLIZE, IT DOES
TENT TO USE LESS MATERIALS,
BECAUSE IT'S DONE IN A FACTORY
WHERE THEY CAN, THEY DON'T HAVE
THE SAME KIND OF WASTE WHEN
THEY BUILD ON SITE.
A LOT OF THESE SUSTAINABLE
LIVING INNOVATIONS, TILEY HAS
WATER REUSE SYSTEMS, AND
INTEGRATED SOLAR INTO IT, SO IT
CAN CREATE POSSIBILITIES FOR
NEW TYPES OF CONSTRUCTION THERE
AS WELL.
CROSS LAMINATED TIMBER IS
SOMETHING WE'RE NOT YET SEEING
MUCH, BUT WE'VE RECENTLY
AMENDED THE BUILDING CODE TO
MAKE IT MUCH EASIER.
WE'RE HOPEFUL OVER THE COMING
YEARS THAT IT COULD BE A
PRACTICE THAT WOULD BE REALLY
USEFUL.
WE'RE HOPING IT WOULD ENCOURAGE
THAT AS WELL.
IN TERMS OF MY ENVIRONMENTAL
ANALYSIS, WE DIDN'T TRY TO
QUANTIFY THAT.
THERE'S A LOT OF WHAT IFS, AND
DIFFERENT TYPES OF COMPANIES
DOING THIS WORK.
BUT ONE OF THE PURPOSES OF THIS
IS TO KIND OF MAKE THAT TYPE OF
CONSTRUCTION POSSIBLE, BECAUSE
IT DOES HAVE A NUMBER OF
ENVIRONMENTAL BENEFITS AS WELL
AS POTENTIALLY HOLDING THE
POSSIBILITY OF HELPING TO
REDUCE THE COST OF THE
CONSTRUCTION IN THE LONG TERM.
>> THANK YOU.
I DON'T HAVE ANY ADDITIONAL
QUESTIONS.
>> EXCELLENT, THOSE ARE GOOD
QUESTIONS.
OTHER COUNCILMEMBERS SEEING NO
QUESTIONS.
WE'LL OPEN THE REMOTE PUBLIC
HEARING, AND THEN WE'LL TAKE
SOME VOTES ON SUSPENDING THE
RULES IF YOU'RE COMFORTABLE.
THEN A VOTE ON THE LEGISLATION,
IF YOU'RE COMFORTABLE.
SO BEFORE WE OPEN THE REMOTE
PUBLIC HEARING, I WOULD ASK
THAT EVERYONE PLEASE BE PATIENT
AS WE CONTINUE TO LEARN HOW TO
OPERATE THIS SYSTEM AND
NAVIGATE THROUGH THE INEVITABLE
GROWING PAINS.
WE'RE ADDING NEW FEATURES THAT
ALLOW FOR ADDITIONAL PUBLIC
PARTICIPATION.
EACH SPEAKER WILL BE GIVEN TWO
MINUTES TO SPEAK.
I WILL CALL ON ONE SPEAKER AT A
TIME, AND IN THE ORDER IN WHICH
YOU REGISTERED ON THE COUNCIL'S
WEBSITE.
IF YOU'VE NOT YET REGISTERED
ND WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK, YOU
CAN GO TO THE SEATTLE WEBSITE
AT SEATTLE.GOV/COUNCIL.
WHEN YOU'VE BEEN UNMUTED IT
WILL BE NOTED THAT IT'S YOUR
TIME TO SPEAK.
IF YOU HAVE COMMENTS ABOUT
SOMETHING THAT IS NOT ON
TODAY'S AGENDA, YOU CAN ALWAYS
EMAIL MY OFFICE.
THIS IS JUST ON 120153, THE
SMALL LOT, BELLTOWN SMALL LOTS.
SPEAKERS WILL HEAR A CHIME WHEN
TEN SECONDS ARE LEFT OF YOUR
ALLOTTED TIME.
I WILL THANK YOU AS YOUR TIME
CONCLUDES.
ONCE YOU HEAR THE CLAIM, THOSE
TEN SECONDS ARE LEFT, PLEASE
WRAP UP YOUR COMMENTS.
THE SPEAKER'S MICROPHONE WILL
BE MUTED TO ALLOW US TO CALL ON
THE NEXT SPEAKER.
WE ASK YOU PLEASE DISCONNECT
FROM THE LINE, AND IF YOU PLAN
ON FOLLOWING THIS MEETING,
PLEASE JOIN US ON THE AGENDA.
WE WILL BEGIN WITH THE FIRST
SPEAKER ON THE LIST.
WE HAVE SEVEN SPEAKERS LISTED.
TOM EENS, KEN PHILLIPS, AND
ALLEN KLEIN, YOU ARE NOT
PRESENT, SO PLEASE REFER TO THE
EMAIL YOU RECEIVED, AND CALL IN
NOW.
IF YOU ARE ON THE LISTEN LINE,
YOU ARE IN THE WRONG PLACE.
SO I'LL RUN DOWN THE LIST, SO
EVERYONE KNOWS WHERE WE ARE.
HOWARD ANDERSON, TOM EENS.
JIMMY BLAZE.
ALLEN KLEIN.
WITH THAT, AND NO FURTHER ADO,
GOOD MORNING, MEGAN.
HOW ARE YOU TODAY?
>> HI.
GOOD MORNING.
CAN YOU HEAR ME?
>> WE CAN.
>> OKAY, GREAT, THANK YOU.
YES, I WANT TO TALK ABOUT
CB120153.
THIS BILL WILL INCREASE THE
WIDTH OF BELLTOWN SMALL LOT
BUILDINGS AND REDUCE THE
REQUIREMENTS FOR THEIR UPPER
LEVEL SET BACKS.
BUILDING WITH SET BACKS ARE
ELEMENTS PUT IN THE CODE
SPECIFICALLY TO PROTECT
ADJACENT BUILDINGS AND THE
STREET.
AS WRITTEN THIS EXPEDITES
MODULAR PROPERTY.
IT'S A TRADEOFF WE DON'T NEED
TO MAKE.
WE NEED TO CONSIDER THE
BUILDINGS FOR GENERATIONS.
THEY SHOULD BE CONSTRUCTED TO
LEAVE A LASTING IMPACT.
PEOPLE NEED LIGHTS AND AIR.
THEY MAKE URBAN VILLAGES AND
NEIGHBORHOODS LIVABLE AND
EQUITABLE.
IT'S A MISTAKE TO THINK WE
CAN'T PRESERVE BOTH PUBLIC
HEALTH AND THE ENVIRONMENT.
THERE'S A SUSTAINABLE ARCHITECT
IN BELLTOWN NAMED TOM EENS, I
HOPE HE SPEAKS TODAY TO PROVIDE
FOR MODULAR CONSTRUCTION WHILE
MAINTAINING ADEQUATE NIGHTS IN
NEIGHBORHOOD BUILDINGS AND
STREETS.
WE REALLY CAN AND SHOULD DO
BOTH.
PLEASE DON'T VOTE ON THIS BILL
TODAY AND BREAK PROTOCOL.
PLEASE TAKE TIME, DISCUSS HIS
AMENDMENTS, AND HOPEFULLY ADOPT
THEM.
THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU, MEGAN.
ALWAYS GREAT TO HEAR YOUR
VOICE.
UP NEXT IS MICHAEL MAN,
FOLLOWED BY HOWARD ANDERSON,
AND TOM EENS, IF YOU CALL IN.
MICHAEL MAN TAKE IT AWAY.
GOOD MORNING.
>> GOOD MORNING CHAIR STRAUSS
AND COMMITTEE MEMBERS.
MY NAME IS MICHAEL MAN, I'M
HERE SUPPORTING SUSTAINABLE
INNOVATIONS IN SUPPORT OF
COUNSEL BILL NUMBER 120153.
DEVELOPING A PRE-MANUFACTURED
BUILDING SYSTEM FOR OVER A
DECADE.
THE COMPANY ASSEMBLES THEM AT
THE JOB SITE.
THIS INNOVATION AND BUILDING
ALLOWS GREATER SUSTAINABILITY,
AND AFFORDABILITY INTO ITS
PROJECTS.
ITS FIRST BUILDING IN THE
UNIVERSITY DISTRICT USES 70%
LESS ENERGY THAN A TYPICAL
RESIDENTIAL UNIT.
IN UNIT, THEY BROKE GROUND ON
THE FIRST MULTIGENERATIONAL
FAMILY HIGH RISE IN BELLTOWN.
THAT PROJECT WILL ALSO INCLUDE
27 RENT RESTRICTED AFFORDABLE
UNITS.
COUNCIL BILL 120153 IS
IMPORTANT TO SLI, BECAUSE IT'S
PREMANUFACTURED PRODUCT IS
ESSENTIALLY LIMITED TO A BOX
SHAPE.
WHAT SLI CAN DO WITH THIS
TECHNOLOGY IS TO BUILD ON SMALL
LOTS.
THE 303 BATTERY PROJECT WILL
HAVE 112 UNITS ON A PARCEL THAT
IS JUST 6500 SQUARE FEET.
THAT MAY BE THE MOST DENSE
HOUSING PROJECT IN THE CITY.
SLI AND ITS TECHNOLOGY CAN HELP
THE CITY ACHIEVE HOUSING
AFFORDABILITY GOALS.
THIS LEGISLATION WILL PROVIDE
GREATER OPPORTUNITIES TO
ACHIEVE THOSE GOALS IN THE
BELLTOWN NEIGHBORHOOD.
>> THANK YOU, MICHAEL.
UP NEXT, WE HAVE HOWARD
ANDERSON.
FOLLOWED BY TOM EENS.
THEN JIMMY BLAZE.
FOLLOWING JIMMY IS KEN PHILLIPS
JR. AND ALLEN KLEIN.
ALL THREE ARE NOT PRESENT AT
THIS TIME.
IF YOU'D LIKE TO TESTIFY PLEASE
CALL IN TO THE LINE ON THE
EMAIL THAT WAS SENT TO YOU.
HOWARD ANDERSON, GOOD MORNING.
>> YES, GOOD MORNING.
HOWARD ANDERSON.
LONG TIME OCCUPANT OF OFFICES
DOWNTOWN.
FORMER OWNER OF PROPERTY IN
BELLTOWN.
CONSTANTLY INVOLVED WITH WHAT'S
GOING ON IN BELLTOWN.
I'M THE CHAIRMAN OF THE DENNY
TRIANGLE NEIGHBORHOOD
ASSOCIATION.
VERY INVOLVED.
BELLTOWN IS A SPECIAL
RESIDENTIAL GYM.
HOWEVER, IT HAS BEEN THE 145
ZONE HEIGHTS HAVE BEEN VERY
RESTRICTIVE BECAUSE THE CURRENT
ZONING THAT'S IN PLACE.
BRENDAN'S OUTLINE OVERVIEW IS A
CLEAR PICTURE OF WHAT THIS NEW
ZONING OPENS UP.
AND WITH THE EIGHT OWNERS AND
BRIAN'S ARCHITECTIAL FIRM THE
LAST FEW YEARS, WE HAVE BEEN
COMMUNICATING.
WE FIND THAT THE SOLUTIONS ARE
BASED ON REAL EFFECTIVENESS,
GETTING US A GOOD HOUSING BASE
COST WISE AND FOR LAYOUT.
BETTER LAYOUTS AND WITHOUT
IMPACTING THE ENVIRONMENT.
THE ZONING THAT WE'RE WORKING
WITH IS APPLYING NOW TO SMALL
LOTS THAT'S 14,500 OR LESS.
THAT'S TWO LOTS.
THERE CAN BE SOME TRADITIONAL
WORK IN A TWO LOT.
THE ONE PROBLEM THAT OUR GROUP
HAS, THERE'S EIGHT OF OUR
OWNERS.
THEY'RE SEEING A COUPLE, THREE
OF THEM HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO
END UP WITH THREE LOTS, OR FOUR
LOTS.
AND THAT CURRENT ZONING WILL
NOT BENEFIT THEM.
HOWEVER, IF THEY BROKE UP THOSE
PROPERTIES AND DO TWO SEPARATE
DEVELOPMENTS, THEY COULD THEN
HAVE USE THIS NEW ZONING.
WE THINK THAT THERE NEEDS TO BE
FURTHER STUDY.
WE WANT TO ENDORSE THIS AS IT
IS.
BRENNON'S GROUP HAS DONE A
TERRIFIC JOB.
THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU.
APPRECIATE YOU CALLING IN.
AND SHARING YOUR PERSPECTIVE
THIS MORNING.
TOM, YOU HAVE CALLED IN.
THANK YOU.
SO WE HAVE UP NEXT, TOM
FOLLOWED BY JIMMY, KEN PHILLIPS
AND ALLEN KLEIN ARE NOT
PRESENT.
PLEASE DO CALL IN IF YOU WOULD
LIKE TO SPEAK.
GOOD MORNING, TOM.
PLEASE TAKE IT AWAY.
>> GOOD MORNING.
MY NAME IS TOM EENS.
I'M ADDRESSING COUNCIL BILL
120153.
I WANT TO MAKE IT CLEAR I'M NOT
OPPOSED TO THIS BILL.
THE ALTERNATE LOT COVERAGES
THAT ARE ALLOWED HERE ARE NOT A
HUGE CHANGE AND ALLOW RATIONAL
DESIGN WHETHER THE BUILDING IS
MODULAR OR CONVENTIONAL.
I'VE SENT YOU SEVEN PAGES IN
COMMENTS ABOUT THIS
LEGISLATION.
THE GOALS ARE TO MAKE THIS
LEGISLATION SUCCEED BETTER IN
ITS GOALS AND MAINTAIN THE
OPENNESS OF OUR GREEN STREETS.
THE GREEN STREETS ARE CRITICAL
TO THE CHARACTER AND
LIVEABILITY OF OUR
NEIGHBORHOOD.
THE CHANGE THAT'S PROPOSED HERE
GOES IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION,
BUT IT DOES NOT GO FAR ENOUGH.
THE GREEN STREET SET BACK IS
WIDELY MISUNDERSTAND IN THIS
STATE.
BUT BASICALLY, NOT ABOUT THE
THE SHADOWS THAT ARE CAST BY
TALL BUILDINGS.
IT'S ABOUT THE OPENNESS OF THE
STREET SPACE AND THE OPEN SKY.
THE 10-FOOT UNIFORM SET BACK
PROPOSED HERE WILL ACTUALLY
IMPAIR LIGHT TO THE STREET.
I HAVE DEMONSTRATED THAT
CONCLUSIVELY IN THE GRAPHIC
ANALYSIS THAT I SUBMITTED ON
MONDAY.
THIS CAN BE FIXED BY CHANGING
THAT UNIFORM SET BACK TO 14
FEET.
THAT WILL PRESERVE THE OPENNESS
OF THE STREET SPACE TO THE SKY.
IT WILL NOT IMPAIR LIGHTS.
MORE IMPORTANTLY, IT WILL WORK
ON BOTH SIDES OF THE STREET,
WHICH THE PROPOSED 10 FEET SET
BACK WILL NOT.
SO I HAVE ADDITIONAL COMMENTS
IN WRITING.
I CAN'T GO INTO THEM TODAY
ABOUT THE ROLE OF THE DESIGN
AND REGULAR LATING THE
STANDARDS OF THIS LEGISLATION.
SO PLEASE DO NOT VOTE ON THIS
PROPOSAL TODAY.
I URGE COMMITTEE AND STAFF TO
TAKE THE TIME TO ADDRESS THE
ISSUES RAISED IN MY WRITTEN
COMMENTS AND IMPROVE THIS
LEGISLATION, AND I THANK YOU
FOR YOUR TIME.
>> THANK YOU, TOM.
UP NEXT WE HAVE JIMMY.
AND THEN KEN AND ALLEN ARE
STILL NOT PRESENT.
SO GENTLEMEN, IF YOU'D LIKE TO
SPEAK PLEASE DO NOW.
JIMMY, TAKE IT AWAY.
>> GOOD MORNING, AND THANK YOU.
MY NAME IS JIMMY BLAZE.
WE OWN A NUMBER OF LOTS IN THE
BELLTOWN NEIGHBORHOOD.
I'D LIKE TO EXPRESS MY SUPPORT
FOR THE PROPOSED ORDINANCE.
THE CURRENT CODE MAKES BUILDING
ON SMALL LOTS INCREDIBLY
CHALLENGING.
THE CODE CALLS FOR A LAYERED
CAKE TYPE DESIGN, WHERE
BUILDING MUST CONTINUOUSLY BE
SET BACK THE HIGHER IT GOES.
THIS CREATES ARCHITECT TECH
IALLY UNAPPEALING BUILDINGS.
I'D LIKE TO REQUEST ONE
AMENDMENT.
THE LAST SENTENCE WITHIN
SECTION B STATES IF THE
STRUCKTURE IS LOCATED ON THE
SOUTHERN SIDE OF THE GREEN
STREET, THE SUB STANDARDS STILL
APPLY.
THIS SENTENCE WOULD REQUIRE
PARCEL TO BUDDING THE SOUTHERN
SIDE OF A GREEN STREET TO STILL
APPLY WITH THE OVERLY COMPLEX
REQUIREMENTS THAT THIS
ORDINANCE IS PROPOSING TO
CHANGE.
BUILDING DESIGN AND
CONSTRUCTION CHALLENGES DO NOT
VARY BASED ON THE SIDE OF THE
STREET THAT THE PARCEL IS
LOCATED ON.
THE CHANGES IN LIGHT
TRANSMITTAL THAT THE CODE
AMENDMENT HERE IS TRYING TO
GIVE BACK TO ARE MINIMAL
BETWEEN THE DIFFERENT BUILDING
DESIGNS ALLOWED BETWEEN THE OLD
CODE AND THE PROPOSED
ORDINANCE.
MEANWHILE, THE CHANGES ARE
INCREDIBLY IMPACT ON THE
ECONOMIC VIABILITY OF FUTURE
PROJECTS.
I RESPECTFULLY REQUEST THAT
THIS SENTENCE BE REMOVED FROM
THE ORDINANCE.
ALL PARCELS WITHIN THE BELLTOWN
NEIGHBORHOOD BE BUILT WITHIN
THE SAME STANDARDS.
I LOOK FORWARD TO THIS
ORDINANCE MOVING FORWARD TODAY
WITH THE REQUESTED AMENDMENT.
>> THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU, JIMMY.
I.T., I'M CONFIRMING WITH YOU
AT THIS TIME THAT THERE ARE NO
FURTHER REGISTRANTS FOR THIS
PUBLIC HEARING PRESENT FOR US
AS KEN AND ALLEN ARE NOT
PRESENT, IS THAT CORRECT?
>> THERE ARE NO MORE PUBLIC
HEARING REGISTRANTS FOR
CB120153.
>> THANK YOU, THAT OUR OUR LAST
SPEAKER PRESENT TO SPEAK ON
THIS HEARING.
THE HEARING IS NOW CLOSED.
THANK YOU TO EVERYONE WHO
PROVIDED COMMENT TODAY.
COLLEAGUES BECAUSE THIS IS THE
SECOND MEETING WE HAVE BEEN
BRIEFED ON, I WOULD LIKE TO
CONSIDER SUSPENDING THE RULES
TO VOTE ON THE LEGISLATION
TODAY AS SEEING AS THIS IS
AGAIN THE SECOND MEETING.
WITH MORE THAN A MONTH, ABOUT
SIX MONTHS IN BETWEEN THOSE TWO
MEETINGS.
WE'VE HAD A LONG AGENDA PLANNED
FOR FRIDAY AFTERNOON WHICH IS
WHY I WOULD PREFER TO VOTE IT
OUT TODAY, RATHER THAN ON
FRIDAY, LIKE THE REST OF THE
BILLS, BECAUSE THE REST OF THE
BILLS, THIS IS THEIR FIRST TIME
IN COMMITTEE.
COLLEAGUES, ANY FEEDBACK ON
YOUR COMFORT LEVELS SUSPENDING
THE RULES AND MOVING FORWARD.
>> NO OBSERVATION TO SUSPENDING
THE RULES.
>> GREAT, THUMBS UP, NO
OBJECTION.
ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION?
SEEINGNONE.
I MOVE TO SUSPEND THE RULES TO
ALLOW US TO VOTE ON COUNSEL
BILL 120153 ON THE SAME DAY AS
PUBLIC HEARING.
IS THERE A SECOND?
>> SECOND.
>> THANK YOU, IT HAS BEEN MOVED
AND SECONDED.
TO SUSPEND THE RULES WILL THE
CLERK PLEASE CALL THE ROLE.
>> PEDERSEN?
>> YES.
>> COUNCILMEMBER LEWIS.
>> YES.
>> COUNCILMEMBER JUAREZ.
>> AYE.
>> CHAIR STRAUSS.
>> YES.
>> FOUR IN FAVOR, NONE OPPOSED.
>> MOTION CARRIES.
IS THERE ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION
BEFORE WE VOTE ON THIS BILL?
I KNOW WE HAVE HAD A QUITE
EXPENSIVE BRIEFING OF
INFORMATION ON IT.
I'M NOT SEEING ANY.
IN FACT, I'M BEING URGED TO
MOVE FASTER.
IS THERE, SO I MOVE TO
RECOMMEND PASSAGE OF COUNSEL
BILL 120153 IS THERE A SECOND?
>> SECOND.
>> IT HAS MOVED AND SECONDED.
WILL THE CLERK PLEASE CALL THE
ROLE?
>> COUNCILMEMBER PEDERSEN?
>> YES.
>> COUNCILMEMBER LEWIS.
>> DEGREE.
>> JUAREZ,.
>> AYE.
>> FOUR IN FAVOR, NONE OPPOSED.
>> THANK YOU ALL.
THIS WILL COME BEFORE THE
COUNSEL ON MONDAY THE 27th.
OUR FINAL ITEM OF BUSINESS
TODAY ADOPTS REGIONAL
TRANSFERAL DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS
PROGRAM.
>> MR. OM, WILL YOU PLEASE READ
THE ABBREVIATED BILL INTO
RECORD.
>> FACILITATE THE TRANSFER OF
DEVELOPMENTAL RIGHTS FROM
PIERCE TO SNOHOMISH COUNTIES TO
SEATTLE.
>> MR. FREEMAN WILL YOU WALK US
THROUGH THIS LEGISLATION?
>> THANK YOU, CHAIR STRAUSS.
I BRIEFLY REMIND ABOUT THE
LEGISLATIVE HISTORY HERE.
TALKING ABOUT WHAT 120181 WOULD
DO, AND BRIEFLY DESCRIBE THE
NEXT STEPS.
SO A LITTLE BIT ON THE
LEGISLATIVE HISTORY, BACK IN
2007, THE STATE AUTHORIZED A
REGIONAL TDR PROGRAM FOR
CENTRAL PUGET SOUND THAT
AUTHORIZING STATUTE IN 343362.
IN 2013, THE CITY AND KING
COUNTY TOOK ADVANTAGE OF THAT
AUTHORIZATION.
PASSED THREE ORDINANCES.
AN ORDINANCE THAT ESTABLISHED A
LOCAL INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECT
AREA, AND AUTHORIZED THE MAYOR
AT THE TIME TO EXECUTE A LOCAL
AGREEMENT WITH KING COUNTY, AND
THAT ALSO INCLUDES SOMETHING
SORT OF A TIF LIKE TAX LIKE
COMPONENT FOR SOUTH LAKE UNION
IN DOWNTOWN.
AN ORDINANCE THAT ACCEPTED AN
ALLEGATION OF TRANSFER AND
DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS FROM KING
COUNTY ADOPTED AN
INFRASTRUCTURE PLAN PRIMARILY
FOR TRANSPORTATION
INFRASTRUCTURE IN SOUTH LAKE
UNION AND AN ORDINANCE THAT
AMENDED THE LAND USE PROGRAM.
I BRING THOSE UP BOTH TO REMIND
YOU OF THE LEGISLATIVE HISTORY,
BUT ALSO TO GET TO THE PURPOSE
OF THE BILL, WHICH WOULD AVOID
SOME OF THESE COMPLICATING
IMPLEMENTATION STEPS.
COLLECTIVELY, THOSE ORDINANCE
ESTABLISHED A TDR PROGRAM WITH
KING COUNTY, AND THAT PROGRAM
ALLOWS DEVELOPMENT AND
RECEIVING AREAS IN SOUTH LAKE
UNION, DOWNTOWN, TO ACHIEVE A
BONUS FLOOR AREA TO THE PURPOSE
OF DEVELOPMENTAL RIGHTS.
THE KING COUNTY PROGRAM HAS
BEEN PRETTY SUCCESSFUL TODAY,
AND IS PRESERVED APPROXIMATELY
ON 1,500 ACRES OF FARMLAND, AND
ABOUT 90,000 ACRES OF FOREST
LAND.
THE TAX INCREMENT FINANCING
PROGRAM OF THE CITY WHICH
PARTICIPATES IN, WHICH GOES TO
THE CITY THE COUNTY'S PROPERTY
TAX, WILL GENERATE ABOUT $4
MILLION THIS YEAR FOR
TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENTS.
SO THAT'S THE LEGISLATIVE
HISTORY AND BACKGROUND.
WHAT WOULD COUNCIL BILL 120181
DO?
IT'S VERY SIMPLE, IT WOULD
AMENDMENT THE LAND USE CODE TO
ADOPT BY REFERENCE, ADOPTION BY
REFERENCE OBVIOUS OBCIATES FROM
RURAL, PIERCE, AND SNOHOMISH
COUNTIES WITHOUT ADOPTION OF
THE WAC, WOULD WE NEED LOCAL
AGREEMENTS WITH BOTH PIERCE AND
SNOHOMISH COUNTIES.
SO WHAT DOES THE WAC REQUIRE?
CITIES AND TOWNS PARTICIPATING
IN THE REGIONAL PROGRAM.
MINIMAL REQUIREMENTS FROM THE
COUNTIES, AND JOIN
REQUIREMENTS.
THOSE ARE LARGELY FOR
DETERMINING HOW DEVELOPMENTAL
RIGHTS PARTICIPATE IN
JURISDICTIONS.
MY UNDERSTANDING IS THIS
LEGISLATION IS NOT SELF
EXECUTING.
MAYBE SOME CORRESPONDING
CHANGES TO REGULATIONS THAT ARE
TO HAPPEN IN BOTH OF THOSE
COUNTIES AS WELL.
TODAY THERE'S A PUBLIC HEARING
ON THE BILL AND A POSSIBLE VOTE
IS SCHEDULED FOR THIS COMING
FRIDAY.
>> THANK YOU, KETIL.
VERY HELPFUL.
JUST TO KIND OF SUMMARIZE AND
LIFT UP SOME OF THE THINGS THAT
HAVE BEEN SAID.
THIS IS A PROGRAM THAT ALREADY
CONSISTS IN KING COUNTY, THIS
WOULD EXPAND IT TO SNOHOMISH
AND PIERCE COUNTIES.
THOSE DEVELOPMENT PUT IN
DOWNTOWN SEATTLE.
SO THAT MEANS WE GET MORE
DENSITY?
IN THE CITY AND PROTECT FARM
AND WOODLAND IN THE SUBURBS, OR
IN THE RURAL AREAS.
FOR THOSE OF YOU WHO REMEMBER
BEFORE ISSAQUAH WAS DEVELOPED
AND YOU WOULD LIKE EAST FROM
SEATTLE, THERE WOULD BE AN
UNABATED VIEW STRAIGHT TO THE
TREES AND INTO THE MOUNTAINS
WITH NO DEVELOPMENT.
TODAY WE LOOK EAST AND SEE THE
SUBURBS BEFORE THE MOUNTAINS.
THE SAME THING WHEN WE ARE
EITHER ON OUR WAY UP HIGHWAY 2,
OR ON OUR WAY TO MOUNT RAINIER
THROUGH PIERCE AND SNOHOMISH
COUNTIES.
IF WE'D LIKE TO RETAIN OUR
UNABATED VIEWS OF MOUNT RAINIER
AND THE NORTH CASCADES AS TREES
AS WE SEE TODAY, THIS IS A BILL
THAT WOULD DO THAT.
WITH NO FURTHER ADO, COLLEAGUES
ANY QUESTIONS?
SEEING NO QUESTIONS, WE'RE
GOING TO MOVE ON, I GUESS I DO
HAVE ONE, TWO QUESTIONS
QUESTIONS KETIL.
CAN YOU REMIND US OF THE
NEIGHBORHOODS?
>> SOUTH LAKE UNION AND
DOWNTOWN.
THE CITY HAS OTHER TRANSFERABLE
RIGHTS DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS
PROGRAMS, BUT NOT WHERE RURAL
CREDITS FROM AG AND FORESTLAND
ARE TRANSFERRED FROM DOWNTOWN.
WE HAVE TRANSFERABLE
DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS PROGRAMS
THAT ARE ALSO RELATED TO
HISTORIC PRESERVATION, AND
THOSE OPERATE PRIMARILY
DOWNTOWN AS WELL.
>> THANK YOU.
JUST FOR AWARENESS, MR. OM, MY
TEAM HAS HAD CONVERSATIONS WITH
KING COUNTY ABOUT THIS CHANGE,
IS IT ALSO YOUR UNDERSTANDING
THAT KING COUNTY IS SUPPORTIVE
AS WELL AS PIERCE AND SNOHOMISH
COUNTIES?
>> I CAN'T SPEAK FOR PIERCE AND
SNOHOMISH COUNTIES.
I HAVE SPOKEN WITH THE TDR
PROGRAM MANAGER, MICHAEL MURPHY
AT KING COUNTY, AND MY
UNDERSTANDING IS THAT KING
COUNTY IS SUPPORTING OF THIS
CHANGE.
>> GREAT, AND I KNOW THAT
INVITATIONS HAVE BEEN SENT OUT
TO REPRESENTATIVES FROM THOSE
COUNTIES FOR FRIDAY'S MEETING
WHERE THE VOTE WOULD HAPPEN.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS, WE'RE
GOING TO OPEN THE PUBLIC
HEARING.
I WOULD AGAIN ASK THAT EVERYONE
PLEASE BE PATIENT AS WE
CONTINUE TO LEARN TO OPERATE
THIS SYSTEM IN REALTIME, AND
NAVIGATE THROUGH THE INEVITABLE
GROWING PAINS.
WE'RE CONTINUOUSLY LOOKING FOR
WAYS TO. IF YOU HAVE NOT YET
REGISTERED TO SPEAK AND WOULD
LIKE TO, YOU CAN SIGN UP BY
GOING TO THE COUNCIL'S WEBSITE.
THIS LINK IS ALSO ON TODAY'S
AGENDA.
YOU HAVE BEEN UNMUTED WILL BE
THE CUE THAT IT IS THE
SPEAKER'S TURN TO SPEAK.
PUBLIC COMMENTS SHOULD RELATE
TO CB120181.
IF YOU HAVE COMMENTS ON
SOMETHING OTHER THAN ON TODAY'S
BILL, YOU CAN PROVIDE A WRITTEN
COPY TO MY OFFICE OR THE LINK
ON THE COUNCIL EMAIL ADDRESS
THAT IS PRESENTED ON THE SCREEN
DURING PUBLIC TESTIMONY.
SPEAKERS WILL HEAR A CHIME WHEN
TEN SECONDS ARE LEFT OF THE
ALLOTTED TIME.
ONCE YOU HEAR THE CHIME, WE ASK
YOU TO BEGIN TO WRAP UP YOUR
PUBLIC COMMENT.
IF SPEAKERS DO NOT END THEIR
COMMENTS, THE SPEAKER'S
MICROPHONE WILL BE MUTED.
WE ASK THAT YOU PLEASE
DISCONNECT FROM THE LINE AND IF
YOU PLAN TO CONTINUE FOLLOWING
THIS MEETING, PLEASE DO SO ON
THE LISTENING OPTIONS ON THE
AGENDA.
WE WILL BEGIN WITH THE FIRST ON
THE LIST.
WE HAVE THREE PEOPLE SIGNED UP.
THE FIRST PERSON IS NOT
PRESENT.
SO MICHAEL BRATTON, NICK
BRATTON, EXCUSE ME, YOU ARE THE
FIRST PERSON ON THE LIST, BUT
YOU ARE NOT PRESENT.
THE OTHER TWO PEOPLE ARE
MICHAEL MURPHY AND REBECCA
SCHWARTZMAN.
PLEASE LOOK AT THE AGENDA ON
THE EMAIL.
THE LISTEN LINE IS NOT THE
CORRECT LINE.
>> GOOD AFTERNOON, THANKS FOR
HAVING ME.
THIS IS MICHAEL MURPHY.
I APPRECIATE THE TIME.
AGAIN, MICHAEL MURPHY.
I RUN THE TRANSFER OF
DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS FOR KING
COUNTY.
I WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK IN FAVOR
OF COUNSEL BILL 120181 TODAY.
AS WAS MENTIONED EARLIER, THE
TRANSFER OF DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS
SYSTEM ACHIEVES MULTIPLE GOALS
AT PROTECTING FORESTS AND FARMS
IN THE REGION, PRESERVING THAT
DEVELOPMENT POTENTIAL WHEN THE
LAND IS CONSERVED, A UNDERSTAND
FOCUSING THE GROWTH IN URBAN
CENTERS OF THE REGION.
WE HAVE HAD A FANTASTIC
AGREEMENT WITH THE CITY OF
SEATTLE SINCE 2013 THAT'S
ENABLED US TO PROTECT OVER
90,000 ACRES OF FORESTS AND
FARMS IN KINGI COUNTY.
THE EFFECT OF THIS IS TO OPEN
TO PIERCE AND SNOHOMISH
COUNTIES INTO DOWNTOWN SEATTLE
AS WELL.
CONSERVATION IS A REGIONAL
ENDESERVER.
ALL OF THE RESIDENTS OF THE
REGION BENEFIT WHEN WE CONSERVE
IN ANY OF THE COUNTIES THAT
WE'RE TALK BEING HERE.
THE OTHER THING THE LEGISLATION
WOULD DO WOULD BRING SEATTLE'S
CODE INTO ALIGNMENT WITH THE
INTENT OF THE REGIONAL
LEGISLATION THAT SET THIS
SYSTEM UP.
WITH THAT, I URGE YOUR, I THANK
YOU FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION OF
THIS, AND URGE YOU TO PASS THIS
BILL WHEN IT COMES TO A VOTE.
THANKS MUCH.
>> THANKS MICHAEL.
WE'D LOVE TO HAVE YOU BACK ON
FRIDAY, IF YOU'RE INTERESTED.
>> I WILL BE THERE FOR SURE.
>> UP NEXT IS REBECCA
SCHWARTZMAN, AND NICK BRATTON,
WE STILL DON'T SEE YOU PRESENT,
SO PLEASE CALL IN NOW IF YOU'D
LIKE TO TESTIFY.
REBECCA, GOOD AFTERNOON.
I SEE YOU THERE, AND YOU'RE OFF
MUTE, SO JUST MAKE SURE THAT
YOUR PHONE IS NOT MUTED.
PRESS THE STAR 6 AGAIN.
THERE YOU ARE.
YOU'RE OFF MUTE.
I CAN'T HEAR YOU.
IS YOUR PHONE ON MUTE?
NOT THE STAR 6, BUT JUST YOUR
MUTE BUTTON?
YOUR OFF OF MUTE, NOW YOU'RE
BACK ON MUTE.
YOU'RE OFF MUTE.
I.T., ANY SUGGESTIONS?
>> WE HAVE NO SUGGESTIONS.
>> INTERESTING.
>> REBECCA, IF YOU WOULD LIKE
TO SEND IN WRITTEN COMMENTS,
I'LL READ YOUR COMMENTS AT THE
NEXT COUNCIL MEETING, IF THAT
WORKS.
I'LL GIVE YOU A COUPLE MORE
SECONDS AS NICK BRATTON IS NOT
PRESENT.
I.T., CAN YOU CONFIRM NICK
BRATTON IS NOT PRESENT?
>> AFFIRMATIVE.
THERE ARE NO OTHER PUBLIC
HEARING REGISTRANTS FOR
CB120181.
>> THANK YOU.
REBECCA, ONE LAST TRY, MAKING
SURE YOUR PHONE ISN'T ON MUTE
ON YOUR OWN SIDE.
MAYBE PRESS STAR 6 AGAIN.
I SEE YOU'RE OFF-MUTE CURRENTLY
ON OUR PUBLIC HEARING.
>> IS THIS WORKING?
>> THERE WE ARE.
REBECCA SCHWARTZMAN.
WELCOME TO THE PUBLIC HEARING.
GOOD AFTERNOON.
>> THANK YOU.
THANK YOU CHAIR STRAUSS AND
COMMITTEE MEMBERS.
MY NAME IS REBECCA SCHWARTZMAN
AND I'M CALLING ON BEHALF OF
FOR TARA.
I'M CALLING TO ASK THAT YOU
SUPPORT THE CITY'S REGIONAL TDR
PROGRAM AS IT IS DRAFTED.
ALONG WITH KEY PARTNERS SUCH AS
KING COUNTY AND THE CITY, FOR
TARA WAS THE CHIEF ARCHITECT OF
THE PROGRAM.
THE PROGRAM HAS EXCEEDED
EXPECTATIONS BOTH IN TERMS OF
THE CONSERVATION OUTCOMES IN
KING COUNTY AND IN TERMS OF HOW
IT'S WORKING WELL, AND IT ING.
DOESN'T NEED ANY CHANGES EXCEPT
FOR ONE.
THE SPIRIT AND LETTER OF THE
STATE LAW FOR THIS PROGRAM IS
FOR PAR PIECE PARTICIPATING
CITIES, UNFORTUNATELY, SEATTLE
IS OUT OF COMPLIANCE WITH THE
STATUTE.
FORTUNATELY, THE ORDINANCE
BEFORE YOU TODAY IS A SIMPLE
TECHNICAL UPDATE THAT RECOMMEND
DAYS THE ISSUE, AND WILL OPEN
THE USE OF CREDITS TO ALL THREE
COUNTIES.
DEMAND REMAINS ROBUST AS NEW
HIGH RISE DEVELOPS HAVE BEEN
PROPOSED.
BY IMPLEMENTING THIS FIX, THE
CITY WILL ACHIEVE THE REGIONAL
SCALE OF THE PROGRAM AS
ENVISIONED AXE UNDERSTAND
ARTICULATED IN STATE LAW.
IT WILL ALSO SET AN EXAMPLE FOR
OTHER CITIES TO FOLLOW IN PLAY
AND IMPORTANT ROLE IN THE
CONSERVATION OF OUR FARMS AND
FORESTS.
THAT MAKES CITIES A BETTER
PLACE TO LIFE AND ALSO DO
BUSINESS.
THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME, AND
PLEASE SEND THE ORDINANCE AS
DRAFTED TO COUNCIL.
>> THANK YOU REBECCA.
AND THANK YOU FOR YOUR
PATIENCE.
ONE LAST TIME, CAN YOU CONFIRM
NICK BRATTON IS STILL NOT
PRESENT?
NO FURTHER PUBLIC COMMENT
REGISTRANTS?
>> AFFIRMATIVE.
>> THANK YOU, FRIEND.
THAT WAS OUR LAST SPEAKER TO
SPEAK AT THIS PUBLIC HEARING.
THE PUBLIC HEARING ON COUNCIL
BILL 120181.
THANK YOU TO ALL WHO PROVIDED
PUBLIC COMMENT TODAY.
THANK YOU FOR STICKING WITH ME
THROUGH FIVE HEARINGS.
I WANT TO THANK ALL THE CENTRAL
STAFF AND ESPECIALLY IAN'S SON
AND ERIC ON OUR ITT TEAM.
IT TOOK A LOT OF MANEUVERING,
AND I APPRECIATE HOW MUCH YOU
HELPED TODAY.
SO NO FURTHER BUSINESS, THIS
CONCLUDES THE WEDNESDAY
SEPTEMBER 22nd, 2021 MEETING.
OUR NEXT MEETING IS FRIDAY.
THANK YOU ALL FOR ATTENDING.
WE ARE ADJOURNED.